PDA

View Full Version : The Bible Is Written In Such A Way That Anyone Can See Whatever They Wish Within It



We Are
Jul 1st 2011, 03:30 PM
Does anyone agree with that statement?

It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19), and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth. It could shed new light on what the Christ speaks in John chapter 9:

John 9
4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

What does everyone think about this? Is what we call the "bible" a sealed up book whose true meanings have not yet been revealed to man? Has it been "night time" for the last 2,000 years?

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 03:38 PM
No,

There is only one 'Truth' and He is Christ.

Christ tells us that;

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.


centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

Each of these 'issues' you mention have adherents, but frankly there is a side to each that is wrong. That there is objective truth is absolute... opposing positions can not both be true....

Part of this struggle is (IMHO) the process the Lord uses to draw us to HImself.

The very struggle (when we are submitted) is the blessing for those who would seek the Lord.

MoreMercy
Jul 1st 2011, 04:13 PM
Our bibles today were translated in ways that you describe and shared but our Bible was definitely not given to us that way when presented to man by Father's chosen oracles.

A short study of the curse of babble might give some insight.
Also seeking and using concordance or using an online FREE concordance might help avoid the language barriers encountered in our bibles by us who do not speak, read or write in archaic Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Another practical way to avoid settling or establishing ones self in cultural and theological slants of our various versions and translations readily available today is to gather and use as many of the same said translations and versions as is possible when we study His words, we can also find all of these online and FREE also.



Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

the rookie
Jul 1st 2011, 04:23 PM
Does anyone agree with that statement?

No. The condition of our heart colors the way we read and hear truth. In fact, it colors the way we read and hear just about everything. Insecurity and fear, for example, can completely change what someone "hears" related to simple conversation. It's why Jesus said repeatedly, "He that has an ear, let him hear..." We can't be arrogant about our ability to hear and understand scripture - the door of humility is the only way into the room.


It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19), and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

These groups tend to agree on about 90% of the word of God and the foundations of evangelical theology, spending time discussing and debating the other 10%. That doesn't make the Bible a subjective work, or written to be understood subjectively.


Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth.

That's a conclusion that's a bit more "postmodern" than "biblical", I think. John said otherwise in 1 John in referencing the Holy Spirit and His role, as Jesus described it, in leading us "into all truth".


It could shed new light on what the Christ speaks in John chapter 9:

John 9
4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

What does everyone think about this? Is what we call the "bible" a sealed up book whose true meanings have not yet been revealed to man? Has it been "night time" for the last 2,000 years?

The goal isn't to "shed new light" on a verse - Ecclesiastes tells us that "there is nothing new under the sun". The goal is to dialogue with the Holy Spirit to connect with the heart of Jesus on the matter. And in context, "night is coming when no one can work" is referencing unprecedented shaking and trouble, not "universal spiritual blindness related to the scriptures".

RollTide21
Jul 1st 2011, 04:28 PM
No,

There is only one 'Truth' and He is Christ.

Christ tells us that;

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.This is very true. However, what does it mean that Jesus is "Truth".




Each of these 'issues' you mention have adherents, but frankly there is a side to each that is wrong. That there is objective truth is absolute... opposing positions can not both be true.... The OP didn't say that there was not an objective Truth. He said that, perhaps we aren't meant to KNOW all of the objective Truth. There's a difference.


Part of this struggle is (IMHO) the process the Lord uses to draw us to HImself.I would agree in that the process of seeking Truth in a daily communion with Christ is how the Lord draws us into Himself.


The very struggle (when we are submitted) is the blessing for those who would seek the Lord.We must struggle in the Will of God, though. If we are seeking Scripture to discover "Truth" outside the Will of God, what are we gaining? Would you say that it is God's Will for each of us to perfectly understand Scripture? Or...would you say that it is God's Will for us to diligently seek Him in Spirit to discover His Will for our individual life?

the rookie
Jul 1st 2011, 04:34 PM
This is very true. However, what does it mean that Jesus is "Truth".

It means that God solved the problem of the transcendent nature of "truth" (as it relates to man's limitations and then, later, man's sin and brokenness) by sending "Truth Personified". By sending "the Word made Flesh" the Truth "dwelt amongst us" and thus was "intimately knowable" as John stated in 1 John 1.


The OP didn't say that there was not an objective Truth. He said that, perhaps we aren't meant to KNOW all of the objective Truth. There's a difference.

There is a difference. But the commonality is that both premises are wrong :) Man can know objective truth through Christ Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is the "Spirit of Truth".

RollTide21
Jul 1st 2011, 05:39 PM
It means that God solved the problem of the transcendent nature of "truth" (as it relates to man's limitations and then, later, man's sin and brokenness) by sending "Truth Personified". By sending "the Word made Flesh" the Truth "dwelt amongst us" and thus was "intimately knowable" as John stated in 1 John 1.



There is a difference. But the commonality is that both premises are wrong :) Man can know objective truth through Christ Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is the "Spirit of Truth".No...I get you, but, it was my assumption that this is not what the OP was referring to.

We can certainly know objective and ultimate Truth in Christ by the Spirit. The question is, is it the Will of God for Christ to show us ALL of the objective Truth in Scripture?

Basically, what I am saying is: Does God want us to do our best to serve Him in Spirit in our daily lives or does He want us to "figure out" the truth or untruth of...say...the Trinity?

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 07:03 PM
This is very true. However, what does it mean that Jesus is "Truth"....

Christ is Truth... we are not. He is THE Truth, there is no other... that was the point of that statement (you will notice the reference to objective Truth in the words that immediately follow.

The OP seems to postulate that because men choose men's teaching over scripture that there is no objective truth... I refute that by quoting Christ Himself saying He is THE TRUTH. (there is no other).


If we are seeking Scripture to discover "Truth" outside the Will of God, what are we gaining? Would you say that it is God's Will for each of us to perfectly understand Scripture? Or...would you say that it is God's Will for us to diligently seek Him in Spirit to discover His Will for our individual life?

What is the difference? It seems you are saying there is a 'sanctioned' process within the Lord's will to seek His Truth, and some other way we might choose?

Psalm 25:5 Lead me in Your truth and teach me,
For You are the God of my salvation;
On You I wait all the day.

Christ is Truth, and the only Truth is what He would lead us to... what other means would there be?

Now, if you speak of those who would seek teachings of man in preference to the Truth, I agree that these are not fruitful... nor can they be Truth.

Christ has told us that a house divided against it's self can not stand. Theology based on contradiction in scripture is false on it's face....

We Are
Jul 1st 2011, 07:55 PM
Interesting replies and an interesting discussion!

MoreMercy - yes, I'm aware of the problems with translations and even some translational discrepencies which can throw huge monkey wrenches into some major theological Christian doctrines. That is a world of discussion in and of itself.

As far as the "Truth" goes, there is something I find interesting: In the scripture, the Christ refers to Himself as the true manna from heaven. What is interesting about manna is that it had to be consumed quickly with any remainder discarded, with new manna coming down on a daily basis. Even the miraculous manna could not just be eaten once and satisfy eternally.

So we have the Christ, who is the Truth, and who also is the manna. It would appear as though there are multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by.

For example, the phrase "the Son will make you free indeed" could have a countless number of meanings to a person on their journey. Perhaps when they first become a "Christian," it means to them that they are saved from "hell." Then later perhaps they would look at it in terms of physical healing. Then perhaps at some point they may use that truth as a reason to leave an unhealthy church environment; then perhaps to comfort them in a time of emotional pain, and so forth and so on.

So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.

And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."

It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." No two people see Him or think of Him exactly alike, and so every person worships a God of his or her own making. Or, as it is written in the book of Judges - "everyone does what is right in his own eyes."

Now, of course we know that when it speaks of this in Judges, it was in the days when "Israel had no king." How might this relate to what Yahshua speaks in the book of John about the "night" coming? And how might it relate to the parables in which the "Master goes away on a long journey before returning again?"

fewarechosen
Jul 1st 2011, 08:04 PM
Does anyone agree with that statement?

It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19), and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth. It could shed new light on what the Christ speaks in John chapter 9:

John 9
4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

What does everyone think about this? Is what we call the "bible" a sealed up book whose true meanings have not yet been revealed to man? Has it been "night time" for the last 2,000 years?

I think like in revelation the book or parts therein are sealed unto the time. perhaps now is that time.

when i read scripture i am aware of things that were right in front of me yet i never saw before. i think we mature in christ. I also know there is a early and later rain, there is also a famine for gods word.

when i look around at this world and i know the vast majority of us are wrong.

1Co 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
1Co 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 08:20 PM
....So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people....

You would not be the first, nor the last to propose this... you would be wrong. (objectively). :)

Christ is THE Truth. Mohammad can not also be a prophet of 'truth' because he acknowledges Christ as a prophet... but not as the Son.

Christ said;

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

There is no way to reconcile the two... Christ is Lord of all, or Lord of nothing... if He was a prophet then He was a false Prophet.

Now if you speak of 'dynamic' Truth, there is a point there. The Lord told me to teach one thing last week in the message, and will have me bring something else this week (but not contradicting)....but I don't read this as your point.


And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."

Do I have 3 or 4 marbles in my pocket?

Of course both could be wrong if I have no marbles... or 6. The thing is that there is an objective answer.


It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." No two people see Him or think of Him exactly alike, and so every person worships a God of his or her own making. Or, as it is written in the book of Judges - "everyone does what is right in his own eyes."....

Paul writes of this very 'disconnect' in refuting the idea. There are not 'different Jesus(s)' as you say, but rather One Christ... and a diversity of gifts (that do produce a variety of views, and functions).

Read what you posted... and then go read 1 Cor 12. It is only 31 verses long... but speaks directly against the thing you bring here.
(Please do not take it personally, I appreciate the topic... but you are wrong here).

There ARE a diversity of gifts, but there is unity.

Please forgive me for being so silly to suggest reading it, It is no trouble to post it...

Please take a look;

1 Corinthians 12
Spiritual Gifts: Unity in Diversity
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant: 2 You know that you were Gentiles, carried away to these dumb idols, however you were led. 3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.
Unity and Diversity in One Body

12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 14 For in fact the body is not one member but many.
15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased. 19 And if they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now indeed there are many members, yet one body. 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary. 23 And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our unpresentable parts have greater modesty, 24 but our presentable parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, 25 that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. 26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.

fewarechosen
Jul 1st 2011, 08:22 PM
Interesting replies and an interesting discussion!

MoreMercy - yes, I'm aware of the problems with translations and even some translational discrepencies which can throw huge monkey wrenches into some major theological Christian doctrines. That is a world of discussion in and of itself.

As far as the "Truth" goes, there is something I find interesting: In the scripture, the Christ refers to Himself as the true manna from heaven. What is interesting about manna is that it had to be consumed quickly with any remainder discarded, with new manna coming down on a daily basis. Even the miraculous manna could not just be eaten once and satisfy eternally. So we have the Christ, who is the Truth, and who also is the manna. It would appear as though there are multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by.

For example, the phrase "the Son will make you free indeed" could have a countless number of meanings to a person on their journey. Perhaps when they first become a "Christian," it means to them that they are saved from "hell." Then later perhaps they would look at it in terms of physical healing. Then perhaps at some point they may use that truth as a reason to leave an unhealthy church environment; then perhaps to comfort them in a time of emotional pain, and so forth and so on.

So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.

And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."

It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." No two people see Him or think of Him exactly alike, and so every person worships a God of his or her own making. Or, as it is written in the book of Judges - "everyone does what is right in his own eyes."

Now, of course we know that when it speaks of this in Judges, it was in the days when "Israel had no king." How might this relate to what Yahshua speaks in the book of John about the "night" coming? And how might it relate to the parables in which the "Master goes away on a long journey before returning again?"

along the lines of what i underlined it makes me think of christs miracle of the bread, he took it broke it and it multiplied.

he also released the spirit. he told his disciples to do as he had done. its also interesting to Note that he gave the bread out then, but he also had some left in the basket. perhaps for those later.

the part i bolded made me think of this - we are all just part of a body we may only each view a certain facet. there is a all truth and it is God we just dont see him fully. yet.

Mar 9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
Mar 9:40For he that is not against us is on our part.

the rookie
Jul 1st 2011, 08:33 PM
No...I get you, but, it was my assumption that this is not what the OP was referring to.

I figured we were on the same page :)


We can certainly know objective and ultimate Truth in Christ by the Spirit. The question is, is it the Will of God for Christ to show us ALL of the objective Truth in Scripture?

John 16:13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.


Basically, what I am saying is: Does God want us to do our best to serve Him in Spirit in our daily lives or does He want us to "figure out" the truth or untruth of...say...the Trinity?

I think that the measure to which we know God is determined by the degree to which we desire God. Hunger by grace leads to more grace. Then we start knocking, then doors are opened, we start seeking, etc. There seems to be some things hidden in this age that are reserved for another age as it relates to definitive answers (i.e. the debates referenced above, for example). Paul spoke of things hidden in the previous ages that are now revealed to us - but if God did that before, odds are good He is doing the same thing in our day :)

That doesn't mean "no objective truth"; just means that the "object" known as "all truth" is really, really big. It's objective, there is a plumb line, it is personified in Christ, and it is knowable. That's why truth related to morality and the boundaries of sin are really clear and fully revealed; the mysteries related to the knowledge of God, however, go on forever.

the rookie
Jul 1st 2011, 08:36 PM
Interesting replies and an interesting discussion!

MoreMercy - yes, I'm aware of the problems with translations and even some translational discrepencies which can throw huge monkey wrenches into some major theological Christian doctrines. That is a world of discussion in and of itself.

As far as the "Truth" goes, there is something I find interesting: In the scripture, the Christ refers to Himself as the true manna from heaven. What is interesting about manna is that it had to be consumed quickly with any remainder discarded, with new manna coming down on a daily basis. Even the miraculous manna could not just be eaten once and satisfy eternally.

So we have the Christ, who is the Truth, and who also is the manna. It would appear as though there are multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by.

For example, the phrase "the Son will make you free indeed" could have a countless number of meanings to a person on their journey. Perhaps when they first become a "Christian," it means to them that they are saved from "hell." Then later perhaps they would look at it in terms of physical healing. Then perhaps at some point they may use that truth as a reason to leave an unhealthy church environment; then perhaps to comfort them in a time of emotional pain, and so forth and so on.

So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.

And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."

It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." No two people see Him or think of Him exactly alike, and so every person worships a God of his or her own making. Or, as it is written in the book of Judges - "everyone does what is right in his own eyes."

Now, of course we know that when it speaks of this in Judges, it was in the days when "Israel had no king." How might this relate to what Yahshua speaks in the book of John about the "night" coming? And how might it relate to the parables in which the "Master goes away on a long journey before returning again?"

Doctrine, and Christology itself, is not a multiple choice, subjective thing to be defined by the beholder. Otherwise, what Paul spoke of in Ephesians 4:1-16 - specifically , verse 13 (the "unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God") would be impossible. One truth, one Jesus, one Holy Spirit (and the five-fold ministry) given to help us come into agreement with humility as one body unified in Him and by Him before He returns.

bob
Jul 1st 2011, 08:42 PM
So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.



If there is no objective absolute truth, how can you be certain that Christ has redeemed you?

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 08:44 PM
If there is no objective absolute truth, how can you be certain that Christ has redeemed you?

Exactly Bob,

Or even that one needed redemption at all. If there is no objective Truth, there can be no Law... and there is no sin...

The slope is slippery indeed. :yes:

Bandit
Jul 1st 2011, 08:45 PM
...So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.

God does not change (Mal. 3:6), so therefore His truth also does not change.


And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."

God alone is right.


It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." ...

But there is only one real Jesus.

RollTide21
Jul 1st 2011, 09:27 PM
Christ is Truth... we are not. He is THE Truth, there is no other... that was the point of that statement (you will notice the reference to objective Truth in the words that immediately follow.

The OP seems to postulate that because men choose men's teaching over scripture that there is no objective truth... I refute that by quoting Christ Himself saying He is THE TRUTH. (there is no other).The OP was not insinuating that there is no objective Truth. I haven't read his subsequent posts, but that wasn't the gist of the original post. The OP was suggesting that all possible objective Truth has NOT BEEN REVEALED. ***Edit---OK. I read his next post and he said that he proposed that there was no absolute, objective Truth. I would disagree with that, but my point in this post stands***

Christ is certainly the Truth...insomuch as we can be certain that everything we glean from His Spirit is Truth.




What is the difference? It seems you are saying there is a 'sanctioned' process within the Lord's will to seek His Truth, and some other way we might choose?

Psalm 25:5 Lead me in Your truth and teach me,
For You are the God of my salvation;
On You I wait all the day.

Christ is Truth, and the only Truth is what He would lead us to... what other means would there be?There is no other means of pure Truth than that of the Spirit of Christ. The question is...what Truth shall we learn from Christ? The correct answers to all of the theological questions? Is that God's Will? John 16:13 is oft quoted that the Spirit will lead us into "all truth". Assuming all Believers can be included in the context of this statement and not just the Disciples, what is "all truth"? The complete and perfect reconciliation of Scripture? Maybe. But...if that is the case, then we have all fallen short because NONE of us agree on everything. Or is the call of Christ much simpler? Perhaps we are to simply receive Christ and follow Him in our life. We are to Walk in the Spirit, serving God and bringing others to Christ. If so, then "Truth" is revealed as God wills in our individual lives.


Now, if you speak of those who would seek teachings of man in preference to the Truth, I agree that these are not fruitful... nor can they be Truth.Which Scriptural doctrine is that of man and which is that of God?


Christ has told us that a house divided against it's self can not stand. Theology based on contradiction in scripture is false on it's face.... So...which theology is without contradiction?

AmongTheLeast
Jul 1st 2011, 09:46 PM
The Bible is written in such a way that God can communicate with his children.

1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

The problem with most people, including myself, is that they try to read the bible and interpret it instead of letting the Holy Spirit interpret for you. Read the bible in such a way that you let God speak to you. Pray to God for your daily bread.

Deu_8:3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

For only by the Word our Christ can we find life.

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 09:49 PM
The OP was not insinuating that there is no objective Truth. I haven't read his subsequent posts, but that wasn't the gist of the original post. ....

You may want to, the 'different Jesus' comment posted an hour ago does clarify the OP somewhat.


.....It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus."




Which Scriptural doctrine is that of man and which is that of God?

So...which theology is without contradiction?

I believe that the answer to both questions is the same... the theology without contradiction is from the Lord.

For instance, if I were to quote Matthew 24 here, very few would not say 'amen'.

However, if I quote Matthew 24 and then simply point out what it says, some will object.

Some doctrine / theology relies on parts of scripture to the exclusion of others. In my view these are flawed views. The verse in isolation is less likely to be accurately understood then a verse in the context of the passage, chapter, and the whole of scripture.

Here is an example (eschatology is rich with these 'contradictions').

Pretrib might cite:
1 Thessalonians 5:2

For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.

Or maybe even,


1 Thessalonians 5:2-3


2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. 3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.

Some who may favor pre-trib would be tempted to stop here... Taken in isolation these 2 verses say something that agrees with the pre-trib view... so much so they even name movies with verse 2... ;)

However, you can not stop there. I have to go on to read...


1 Thessalonians 5
The Day of the Lord
1 But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you. 2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. 3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. 4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. 5 You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness.

When you back up and take verse 2 and 3 in context of verse 1, and then look at 4 & 5 you see that the meaning favored by pre-trib is simply not there... the Lord's return as 'as a thief in the night' is not as the "Left Behind" series or many western Christians believe... :no:

Context. I recall when I was asked to teach 1 Thes in a Baptist church, and I noticed that many of the verses were taken out of context (like these). I had to make a decision... which was to; accept and go along, or to admit that I did not know... :eek:

There is one Truth, and I had to decide if I wanted to accept it. :hmm:

Now, of course some will make this into a eschatology thread... that would be unfortunate, but if need be then fine.. the point is that there IS truth.. NONE of us has it all, but the Lord does... and as we seek the Lord in His Word we are lead to it.

We can be lead to it, just as the Lord promises. :)

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 09:55 PM
And to the OP's point...


The Bible Is Written In Such A Way That Anyone Can See Whatever They Wish Within It

In the passage above, verse 2 and 3 taken in isolation CAN be taken to show "whatever they wish" The scripture is not at fault for this, :no: rather the faulty approach taken by the reader. :yes:

RollTide21
Jul 1st 2011, 10:35 PM
You may want to, the 'different Jesus' comment posted an hour ago does clarify the OP somewhat.I edited my post.








I believe that the answer to both questions is the same... the theology without contradiction is from the Lord.OK. I agree. Does anyone have this perfect theology?


For instance, if I were to quote Matthew 24 here, very few would not say 'amen'.

However, if I quote Matthew 24 and then simply point out what it says, some will object.

Some doctrine / theology relies on parts of scripture to the exclusion of others. In my view these are flawed views. The verse in isolation is less likely to be accurately understood then a verse in the context of the passage, chapter, and the whole of scripture.I agree that there are many flawed views. However, which doctrine has the perfect reconciliation?


Here is an example (eschatology is rich with these 'contradictions').

Pretrib might cite:

1 Thessalonians 5:2

For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.

Or maybe even,


1 Thessalonians 5:2-3


2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. 3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.

Some who may favor pre-trib would be tempted to stop here... Taken in isolation these 2 verses say something that agrees with the pre-trib view... so much so they even name movies with verse 2... ;)

However, you can not stop there. I have to go on to read...


1 Thessalonians 5
The Day of the Lord
1 But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that I should write to you. 2 For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. 3 For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. 4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief. 5 You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness.

When you back up and take verse 2 and 3 in context of verse 1, and then look at 4 & 5 you see that the meaning favored by pre-trib is simply not there... the Lord's return as 'as a thief in the night' is not as the "Left Behind" series or many western Christians believe... :no:

Context. I recall when I was asked to teach 1 Thes in a Baptist church, and I noticed that many of the verses were taken out of context (like these). I had to make a decision... which was to; accept and go along, or to admit that I did not know... :eek:

There is one Truth, and I had to decide if I wanted to accept it. :hmm:

Now, of course some will make this into a eschatology thread... that would be unfortunate, but if need be then fine.. the point is that there IS truth.. NONE of us has it all, but the Lord does... and as we seek the Lord in His Word we are lead to it.

We can be lead to it, just as the Lord promises. :)The Lord does indeed have all Truth. I believe the question is...are we seeking the Truths that He would reveal for the Glory of His Kingdom?

Basically, are we too wrapped up in the "Truth" of our doctrinal statements...as evidenced by the myriad of such disagreements as you present (there are likely examples where, what you would declare is obvious Truth, is disagreed upon by another), which can define denominations? Should we simplify our service to Christ down to a seeking of Him in our individual, daily Walk, so as to be led to the fullness of His Will in our lives? If so, we focus on how we, as individuals, can impact the Kingdom in a positive way rather than quibble over doctrines that say nothing about the Truth we are ALL given by the Spirit...which is Christ crucified for our sins and the call to remain in Him and live in Him.

Amos_with_goats
Jul 1st 2011, 10:45 PM
.....Basically, are we too wrapped up in the "Truth" of our doctrinal statements...as evidenced by the myriad of such disagreements as you present (there are likely examples where, what you would declare is obvious Truth, is disagreed upon by another), which can define denominations? Should we simplify our service to Christ down to a seeking of Him in our individual, daily Walk, so as to be led to the fullness of His Will in our lives?

But if you look at my example, you will also see where I point.

I could care less what any theologian has said, if it contradicts what is written in scripture it is leading AWAY from Christ.

In the example I cited.. what appears to be 'versions' of the "truth" are generated by one group selectively ignoring parts of the passage.

I suspect that whatever thing the Lord next challenges me on (as I am very much His work in progress) it will have to do with my own failure to see what is just beyond my current understanding of His Word. I look for that, and when He does show me what ever He desires to show me next, I will receive it with gladness....

It will not change what is already so. It will only show me once again that He is the Lord and I am not. :)

For now, I am very much a child... a loved child under instruction....

1 John 3

1 Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God! Therefore the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. 2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. 3 And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.

MoreMercy
Jul 1st 2011, 11:21 PM
Interesting replies and an interesting discussion!

MoreMercy - yes, I'm aware of the problems with translations and even some translational discrepencies which can throw huge monkey wrenches into some major theological Christian doctrines. That is a world of discussion in and of itself.

As far as the "Truth" goes, there is something I find interesting: In the scripture, the Christ refers to Himself as the true manna from heaven. What is interesting about manna is that it had to be consumed quickly with any remainder discarded, with new manna coming down on a daily basis. Even the miraculous manna could not just be eaten once and satisfy eternally.

So we have the Christ, who is the Truth, and who also is the manna. It would appear as though there are multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by.

For example, the phrase "the Son will make you free indeed" could have a countless number of meanings to a person on their journey. Perhaps when they first become a "Christian," it means to them that they are saved from "hell." Then later perhaps they would look at it in terms of physical healing. Then perhaps at some point they may use that truth as a reason to leave an unhealthy church environment; then perhaps to comfort them in a time of emotional pain, and so forth and so on.

So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.

And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."

It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." No two people see Him or think of Him exactly alike, and so every person worships a God of his or her own making. Or, as it is written in the book of Judges - "everyone does what is right in his own eyes."

Now, of course we know that when it speaks of this in Judges, it was in the days when "Israel had no king." How might this relate to what Yahshua speaks in the book of John about the "night" coming? And how might it relate to the parables in which the "Master goes away on a long journey before returning again?"
Thank you We Are
In one of you paragraphs is the reason some even most from what I observe, do see truth as described by Father and His only begotten Son as being subject to our individual perspective... but it isn't and I will try to share what has been shared with me to share with you, why it is not.
But, I may not get back to a detailed reply until Sunday or even possibly Monday but I am looking forward to and will address every paragraph you posted in the quote above. Even if I have to start another thread I will address each of your paragraphs. I just do not have the time today to offer your position the time, attention and respect it deserves in reply but will by Monday at the latest, Father willing.

I also want to say that I totally understand what you share and to limited extent agree that what you say is in fact what is going on in the majority of living, conversation and beliefs/convictions of confessing Christians today and yesterday.
BUT, it does not have to be that way and is not for some of us. And the reason why it does not have to be that way is what I desire to share with you point by point of what you shared and I quoted above.

Again, I have made plans with family and friends over this weekend but am eager to get back and share with you what He has shared with me.


Stay in what He says is His light, even if it is for now subjected to our limited understanding, because I have and still do and He does not forsake me even if and when I remain blind, lost, imprisoned, sick or necked.
Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

gringo300
Jul 1st 2011, 11:50 PM
For the last several months I've been thinking a lot about this:

If a person is trying to present a falsehood as the truth, he or she HAS to present the truth as a falsehood.

shepherdsword
Jul 2nd 2011, 12:15 AM
Does anyone agree with that statement?

It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19), and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth. It could shed new light on what the Christ speaks in John chapter 9:

John 9
4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

What does everyone think about this? Is what we call the "bible" a sealed up book whose true meanings have not yet been revealed to man? Has it been "night time" for the last 2,000 years?

There is only one truth. However,I think the reason we all see different perspectives is because of doctrinal programming and worldly desires.We set these things up as "idols" in our heart.
It is interesting that God told the Israelites that if they inquired of him through a prophet when they had an idol in their heart he would actually speak to them according to the idol. I think the same thing happens when we read the scriptures with an impure heart. We see what we want to see.

Ezk 14:4 Therefore speak unto them, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Every man of the house of Israel that setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the LORD will answer him that cometh according to the multitude of his idols;

AmongTheLeast
Jul 2nd 2011, 01:00 AM
For the last several months I've been thinking a lot about this:

If a person is trying to present a falsehood as the truth, he or she HAS to present the truth as a falsehood.

Does he or she?

Was Satan telling the truth or presenting a falsehood here?

Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

gringo300
Jul 2nd 2011, 01:19 AM
Does he or she?

Was Satan telling the truth or presenting a falsehood here?

Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

I'm not sure exactly what you are getting at here, but...

I've long observed that statements that are technically absolutely true can be presented in an intentionally deceptive way- for the purpose of deceiving.

For one thing, someone can state something that is technically true- and not tell the WHOLE truth, and present something that is technically true out of context.

Many times, I've seen where the exact words someone said were repeated by someone to one or more other people- taken out of their original context.

AmongTheLeast
Jul 2nd 2011, 01:30 AM
O.K. perhaps I misread. I agree that you can use an absolute truth to present a falsehood. False prophets do it every day.

Go in peace!

nzyr
Jul 2nd 2011, 01:38 AM
Does anyone agree with that statement?



No. I mean some things are very clear. Such as...

Thou shalt not kill.
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Thou shalt not steal.

And...

Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; (1 Timothy 1:15)

Hunter121
Jul 2nd 2011, 03:28 AM
I don't agree, but yes I believe people can see what they want to see, but I don't believe it's been, "night night" because there is a correct translation and many people know. others may see something different, nevertheless there is many who understand the correct translation.

bob
Jul 2nd 2011, 04:43 AM
Exactly Bob, Or even that one needed redemption at all. If there is no objective Truth, there can be no Law... and there is no sin... The slope is slippery indeed. :yes: Yep, there are countless problems this philosophy of relative or subjective truth creates.

MoreMercy
Jul 2nd 2011, 11:16 AM
Interesting replies and an interesting discussion!

MoreMercy - yes, I'm aware of the problems with translations and even some translational discrepencies which can throw huge monkey wrenches into some major theological Christian doctrines. That is a world of discussion in and of itself.

As far as the "Truth" goes, there is something I find interesting: In the scripture, the Christ refers to Himself as the true manna from heaven. What is interesting about manna is that it had to be consumed quickly with any remainder discarded, with new manna coming down on a daily basis. Even the miraculous manna could not just be eaten once and satisfy eternally.

Here is the first place I recognize that our spirits will part, We are. But only if you are actually offering this to postulate some new teaching. I hope you are only tossing it out there for our consideration, meaning: you are open to consider correction.
And this paragraph quoted above is the one I mentioned in my earlier post with the panoramic example of where I see you taking the path that leads you and many, many others to have so many divisions in what should be unity in His "truth"/His words.

Granted that there is more symbolism behind "mana" in the context you presented it but, that is a whole different library of discussion.
So, please just let me say this about it: Christ spoke of Himself as various food stuffs, not just as mana, and if a creature only considers one of the many examples in Father's recorded words when Christ spoke comparing Himself to food stuffs in this way, then that creature is not going to understand "truth" and will indeed end up having a subjective interpretation of that passage and any and all passages approached in the same way, which is not going bring "truth" but the creature will remain in a position void of understanding of what Christ is teaching when He portrays Himself as food stuffs to those who will feed on Him.
I will not share with you those passages in our bible where else He portrays Himself as food stuffs to those who will feed on Him in hopes of teaching you,
I am not a teacher but His disciple and a servant to His friends, who like me search for and diligently seek Him in His words and not just seek Him/His "truth" in a selected passage, chapter or verse, but in the whole of Father's words.
I have learned (and will share below how) that if and when I was or am finally willing to learn of Him first, at His feet, then He will reveal to me everything that He knows I need to know and understand.
But, I can't just find His truth in one selected verse or passage or even a single book in His word.
I have to seek and search for Him in what He and I both call: diligently seeking Him, seeking Him in all of His/His Father's words, not just picking and choosing which passages and verses as you do here with "mana" to support your personal postulation, but I have to diligently seek and search everywhere else He speaks of Himself as food, and even searching elsewhere in scripture and new testament writings where Father speaks of food apart from His Son as a comparison, whether those searches will relate to Christ or not doesn't matter to me because Father will use all things to bless me when I show myself approved by God by my diligently seeking Him in His word this way, and I am rewarded openly with blessing to share with my brethren and the lost no matter if I find what I thought I would find or not, I still come away with what He knew I needed to know to prepare me for His purpose's' for me which is being obedient to "all" of His words to be a living example to those who may observe me and also to continue serving my brethren fruitfully by His standards of fruit and not my or my fellows standards of fruit, and to be an example and light to His lost children and to be in hope of restoring my disobedient brethren.

Do I know all "truth", No !
And, I do not have faith that I will while I am still in my flesh, But, I have faith and am witnessed to that I will and am prepared with the "truth" that He knows I will need to be equipped for what is coming my way and or going to pop up in my paths, always, unless I forsake Him and become and remain apostate.

Topical studies of words used by Christ is what has showed me Christ and Father's thoughts on said topics which revealed to me His truth on every thing I need now and have needed in my history and will need in my future with the Holy Spirits comfort to fulfill pleasing my Creator, which is what and why all of us were created, to please the Creator....that is the purpose of truth too, to enable us to please Him.
Take that or leave it. I am not a teacher, I am His disciple.






So we have the Christ, who is the Truth, and who also is the manna. It would appear as though there are multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by.
I agree to an extent but I would portray the continual revealing as a personal revealing to us individually in proportion to our growing/evolving in Him (being transformed by the renewing of our minds) individually by Him and not as a prophetic revealing as the centuries or decades pass by humanity as a whole.
But, as individual maturity in His words develops in the minds of His obedient children by their personal diligence in seeking Him to be obedient to what truth He reveals to us when we approach and effort to follow Him this way, transforming and renewing us from fallen creatures, back into Father's only begotten Son's image.
(Christ-likeness)(restoration process to the initial state of un-fallen creatures)

This personal unraveling or revealing of the depths of His "truth" to individuals is more accurately described by me as a deeper and deeper and deeper understanding of His truth and not as a "multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by". The word "multiple" just does not apply here from what I have learned of Him, from Him.
His truth is singular and He is the embodiment thereof and it is only found in Him, and not found in hand picked by men selectively chosen passages and verses nor chapters or even entire books in our bibles,it must be compared with all that He says, no picking and choosing, ignoring or dismissing any of it, it all most be weighed together as a whole to find His truth/Him.

He/the truth is found in the whole of Father's word, eaten as a whole and not selectively portioned to fit our desires.
Again, topical studies of words used by Christ is what has showed me Christ and Father's thoughts on said topics which reveals to me deeper and deeper truth on every thing I need now and have needed in my history too, and will need in my future as well to fulfill pleasing our Creator, which is what and why all of us were created. ALL of us to please the Creator.... that is the purpose of truth too: to facilitate us pleasing Him.





For example, the phrase "the Son will make you free indeed" could have a countless number of meanings to a person on their journey. Perhaps when they first become a "Christian," it means to them that they are saved from "hell." Then later perhaps they would look at it in terms of physical healing. Then perhaps at some point they may use that truth as a reason to leave an unhealthy church environment; then perhaps to comfort them in a time of emotional pain, and so forth and so on.
Well to me all of those examples you offer apply because all of those examples indicate imprisonment of one sort or another, and "the Son will make you free indeed" applies to all of them, so that does not support your postulation that truth is subjective to a creature's personal perspective or vantage.





So I would propose the idea that there is, in fact, no such thing as absolute, objective Truth, as it is ever evolving and can reveal Itself differently to different people.
The word you used here "evolved" is accurate in that it evolves as a seeker and follower of Christ is transformed/evolved into the image of Christ's example to us. (Growth is the word I would use) But this growth only happens when the seeker decides to diligently seek and follow what He reveals to us as we seek Him.
Diligently seeking Him to the extreme: as an ongoing process and not diligently seeking what we think we need to know or understand, but totally subjecting ourselves to Him by seeking Him in His words all of His words, and not seeking what we think we need to find in His words for our understanding....

It is to simple for most of us to accept that He rewards with the understanding of His words, when we seek ONLY Him in those words. But, this is when we will find the understanding of His words, any of them, and all of them if He allows us the time for the lived or experienced lessons.
This is where and how "absolute, objective Truth" is found, friend, but only when we find Him in His words by looking for Him there and not looking for the understanding of portions of His words. Yeah I already know... it is to simple and uncomplicated to be practical for those who would rather debate or postulate on single passages and verses they desire to scatter their understanding among their fellows in an effort to define their subjective truth.
He is found in His words, that was made clear to me, and when we find Him, He will give us all understanding that is defined by His purpose, corrections, fulfillment, work and example to us, the truth, Him, that is where it is found.
One either understands that or they wish to obstinately and pridefully understand only what they desire to understand. But as you pointed out earlier it only becomes subjective truth, and objective truth will never raise its beautiful head in that environment, I promise you.
A good long read in the book of Ecclesiastes and or Proverbs would profit someone who cannot digest this.




And the fact is, even if one person is "right" and the other is "wrong," each are still convinced in their own mind that they are "right," as there is no way to "prove" who is "right" or "wrong."
Yeah I have noticed,
But, I will not quote scripture or new testament writings to teach "truth" to you or others, UNLESS you inquire of the purpose, identity and work of Christ, because you and anyone with the means and opportunity to post or read here do have the same opportunity as I have to diligently seek Him in His word, giving Him the opportunity to give the truth to us that you so eloquently communicate is so fleeting from you and as you postulate: fleeting from everyone else too.
I agree many, but not everyone !
It has found me We Are,
and I will never let it go, even if my leg is pushed out of socket, or am hung on a cross upside down, or thrown into a king's oven, or fed to a kings beasts... Yeah I know: over dramatic, but so true.





It is my belief that every person, no matter what denomination, worships a "different Jesus." No two people see Him or think of Him exactly alike, and so every person worships a God of his or her own making. Or, as it is written in the book of Judges - "everyone does what is right in his own eyes."
I almost totally agree here, and I make that same point often to those who approach me in humility as you have done. But, I follow up with: well you need to seek Him in His word to find the real Him/truth. You just will not find Him anymore in the words spoke of Him by any mans description, but only find Him by the Holy Spirits amplification of Him when you feed on and seek Him diligently in His Father's recorded words.
WE Are, that is where you will find objective truth.

How will the lost ever find Him/objective truth if everyone says:"truth is subjective to personal interpretation" Someone must point to Him for the lost to find "objective truth" as Christ and His Father describe/define it.
My definition of truth is lacking and still evolving/growing daily too as I grow in Him.
But my knowledge, familiarity and understanding of the opportunity to be restored by and through Him is not lacking, And I will quote those bible passages anywhere and at time at any mans request, because He commands, prepares and equips His obedient children to do that.





Now, of course we know that when it speaks of this in Judges, it was in the days when "Israel had no king." How might this relate to what Yahshua speaks in the book of John about the "night" coming?
I suggest comparing this with other places in our bibles where these words are used and maybe even study of the short book of Jude too, and the apocrypha's book of Esdras also if it is available to you for a deeper and deeper understanding of this subject: night-darkness ... days-times-seasons of drought or darkness.





And how might it relate to the parables in which the "Master goes away on a long journey before returning again?"
If you start a separate thread on this single topic I would be happy to share on it, but starting a new thread with-out your postulation of truth being subjective... because I have shared here with you all that I see is needed to share with a wise creature on that postulation, until or unless my Master reminds or shares with me more about it.



The closer you get to Him in this way, the closer He will get to you We Are, by drawing you closer to His only begotten Son... (revealing the objective truth to you)
I am here to share and witness that to you personally.
That is where and how we find His objective truth.



Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

IMINXTC
Jul 2nd 2011, 01:05 PM
It's for all the reasons the OP presents, and all here have helped to clarify, that I deliberately weigh every position or interpretation in the context of the historical church. The historical church has battles and divisions aplenty, no doubt - that's why we have denominations - but the church (Protestant Church) has long ago hammered out most of the things individuals debate today, and nothing unique or new can be added to the aguments, however appealing.

But, contrary to much of what we see today, the structure of the church remained, and that is to me the critical thing. My allegiance must be to the church as a body at all times and my purpose must be to its unity.

I appreciate individual insights and even interpretations - they can often be very edifying and valuable - but in the long-run I'm only interested in how the church as a body has come to hold to it's varying positions, doctrines and creeds, and do as much as possible to live out the faith within that framework. I will even, when possible, strive to stay close to the middle, or, mainstream, because, frankly, there needs to be a getting on with the life of faith, and an effecting of the lost world around me.

Sure, in the end, it is I, the individual believer, who must decide where and upon what to stand, but I am not to stand alone.

Not talking about traditions here. Talking, rather, of things that have been wrestled down by the people of God over the centuries.

Very few will deny that the local church is being deconstructed today in lieu of individual interpretation and determination, and, curiously, many of the voices orating about the end of time these days are the same voices calling, however subtily, believers away from the flesh-and-blood, scripturally mandated local-church.

BroRog
Jul 2nd 2011, 10:40 PM
Does anyone agree with that statement?I disagree with the statement, because the statement asserts that the Bible is unusual with respect to its form, i.e. "in such a way", which implies that it deviates from the usual way. While it's true that the Bible is inspired writing, it reads like any other written document. In my experience, while I find that the Bible takes effort to read, it is NOT enigmatic or mysterious.


It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19) . . .I think an objective review of the history of denominations and why they form will reveal that it was not the supposed enigmatic nature of the scriptures that fragments the churches, but other things such as empire building, the idolatry of popular personalities, the movement toward humanism, and other things such as these.


. . . and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.I'm not convinced that OSAS or pre-trib are that old. But even so, I think the locus of disagreements are due, not for the suppose reason that the Bible is enigmatic, but are due to the fact that we bring our own presuppositions, philosophies, worldviews, and a-priori assumptions to the text. And as we tend to invest these with our emotions and subjectivity, it takes time for us to let them go.


Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth.This is certainly a logical possibility. But then, if this were actually a fact, we would never know. If one can not know the truth, then one can not convince others of such a thing. First of all, I can not argue that no one can know the truth unless I make an exception for my own views. And even if I were bold enough to suggest that I was the only one who knew the truth, if I argue that you can't know the truth, then I am a fool for attempting to make the argument.

But we don't live in THAT world. We live and act as if we CAN know the truth and that we CAN learn the truth and that the truth CAN be taught. That is where we actually live; the Western view that the truth is knowable makes sense in the real world where we all live.

It does not follow that if we find disagreement among people that the real, actual, truth can't be known. The fact that disagreement and debate is found among men does not logically lead to the conclusion that the world is incomprehensible; and the fact that Christian men and woman disagree about doctrine or the interpretation of various passages of scripture does not logically lead to the idea that the Bible is incomprehensible or enigmatic or that we have been living in nighttime for 2000 years.

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 02:17 PM
Thanks to everyone for the replies. I haven't been able to log on for a few days but I will work on replying to all of the posts addressed to me throughout the day today.

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 04:52 PM
You would not be the first, nor the last to propose this... you would be wrong. (objectively). :)

Christ is THE Truth. Mohammad can not also be a prophet of 'truth' because he acknowledges Christ as a prophet... but not as the Son.

Christ said;

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

There is no way to reconcile the two... Christ is Lord of all, or Lord of nothing... if He was a prophet then He was a false Prophet.

Now if you speak of 'dynamic' Truth, there is a point there. The Lord told me to teach one thing last week in the message, and will have me bring something else this week (but not contradicting)....but I don't read this as your point.

Well I'd say that the main point of this thread actually deals with the idea that within this current "reality" in which we exist, there is no way to "prove" anything, on an individual basis, that is unseen. In fact, it is by faith only that we accept the fact that the world is round and that it revolves around the sun. From our physical perspective, on an individual basis, the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. Science and technology can say that the earth is round and the it revolves around the sun, but when it comes around down to it, it can not "prove" it to any of us on an individual basis, as absolute truth, because we can not individually, physically see this as being the case from our earthly terrestrial perspective. Of course that is an extreme example, but the point is consistent, especially when dealing with unseen, spiritual matters.


[Do I have 3 or 4 marbles in my pocket?

Of course both could be wrong if I have no marbles... or 6. The thing is that there is an objective answer. [SIZE=3].


Again, to count the marbles is one thing. To "prove" that you have a certain amount of marbles in your pocket to someone else, or even to yourself, without pulling them all out of your pocket or physcially counting them is another. How can anything that is unseen be "proven" as absolute truth? (As we understand the term "proven" to mean in our current existence)


[Paul writes of this very 'disconnect' in refuting the idea. There are not 'different Jesus(s)' as you say, but rather One Christ... and a diversity of gifts (that do produce a variety of views, and functions).

Read what you posted... and then go read 1 Cor 12. It is only 31 verses long... but speaks directly against the thing you bring here.
(Please do not take it personally, I appreciate the topic... but you are wrong here).

There ARE a diversity of gifts, but there is unity.

Please forgive me for being so silly to suggest reading it, It is no trouble to post it...

Please take a look;

1 Corinthians 12
Spiritual Gifts: Unity in Diversity
1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant: 2 You know that you were Gentiles, carried away to these dumb idols, however you were led. 3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.
4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.
Unity and Diversity in One Body

12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 14 For in fact the body is not one member but many.
15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased. 19 And if they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now indeed there are many members, yet one body. 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary. 23 And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our unpresentable parts have greater modesty, 24 but our presentable parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, 25 that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. 26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.

Okay, this is where we start to deal with "earthly" truths vs. "heavenly" truths. Yes, there are many different gifts and and particpants that are spread throughout the one body of the one Christ. However, we are are bound by the limitations of this current reality/existence in which we are contained - ie, the flesh, the earthly region. This is what Paul referred to elsewhere as seeing only the reflection in a mirror of the way things really are.

Many seeming contradictions in scripture can be reconciled by this understanding. For example, scripture teaches that God chooses who will be saved. It also teaches that man chooses his own salvation. The earthly truth is that we choose, while the heavenly truth is that God chooses. Opposing "truths" that are both simultaneously true.

Being that we are in an existence in which we see through a glass darkly, what is "true" to us in this earthly existence is not necessarily true in the heavenly perspective. It is because we are currently existing in the "reflection" and not the true reality. From an earthly perspective, the first are first. From the heavenly, the first are last and the last are first. The same could be said for the greatest must be the lowest servant, he who wishes to save his life must lose it, and so forth and so on.

A mirror shows us our exact image but in the exact opposite form, as a reflection. The mirror shows us the truth and it's directly opposing lie at the same time. This is the reality in which we are currently existing. Interestingly, it is the very next chapter of 1 Corinthians 13 that tells us that:


12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 05:44 PM
along the lines of what i underlined it makes me think of christs miracle of the bread, he took it broke it and it multiplied.

he also released the spirit. he told his disciples to do as he had done. its also interesting to Note that he gave the bread out then, but he also had some left in the basket. perhaps for those later.

the part i bolded made me think of this - we are all just part of a body we may only each view a certain facet. there is a all truth and it is God we just dont see him fully. yet.

Mar 9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
Mar 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
Mar 9:40For he that is not against us is on our part.


This certainly seems to be the case, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 13:

12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

It seems to me that the church body as a whole, would be wise to perhaps dedicate more time and effort in unifying itself (cleaning the inside of the dish, removing the plank from its own eye, etc) than on evangelizing to the world, as all of the divisions and even violent disagreements down through the ages have caused the body of Christ to become marred to the point that it has left the true Christ unrecognizable to the rest of the world. (Isaiah 53)

MoreMercy
Jul 5th 2011, 05:55 PM
I took a look again at the title of this thread and read more of your replies and am beginning to agree to a large degree, but only in regard to the audience who hears or sees it.
And also, according to His foreknowledge and purpose.


Father bless, and have mercy on us.

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 06:11 PM
One truth, one Jesus, one Holy Spirit (and the five-fold ministry) given to help us come into agreement with humility as one body unified in Him and by Him before He returns.

Looking at the current state of the church body and the history of it down through the ages, all the way back to the time when Paul opposed Peter "to his face" in front of the whole assembly (in direct disobedience to the teaching of the Messiah about correcting a brother in private), does it really seem as though the church body of Christ is in "agreement with humility as one body unified in Him?"

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 06:27 PM
If there is no objective absolute truth, how can you be certain that Christ has redeemed you?

The fact is, none of us can be "sure" about this yet, as it has not been fully carried out yet. We know that there will be many on that day who will say "Lord, Lord," but of course, who among us is going to want to believe that we may be one of those people? Who wants to consider the possibility that they may be one of the ones who says "when did we see you hungry and not feed you" before being cast into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels?

And yet, as is clearly taught, a great many are going to be taken by surprise by these things on that day. Clearly, there will be many who believed they were saved from the punishment to come who are not in fact saved from it.

This should keep us seeking, but not out of fear or compulsion. The number one obstacle to spiritual growth is fear.

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 06:37 PM
God does not change (Mal. 3:6), so therefore His truth also does not change.



God alone is right.



But there is only one real Jesus.

These certainly are all very clear and concise answers to put a quick end to the discussion, but If I do say, there is not much thought behind them.

For example, in the time of Moses, was it "true" that Yahweh God required animal sacrifices? Is that same "truth" still in effect today?

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 06:45 PM
The Bible is written in such a way that God can communicate with his children.

1Co 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

The problem with most people, including myself, is that they try to read the bible and interpret it instead of letting the Holy Spirit interpret for you. Read the bible in such a way that you let God speak to you. Pray to God for your daily bread.

Deu_8:3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

For only by the Word our Christ can we find life.

So with this in mind, and taking into account that millions of Christians all dilligently pray and seek to receive greater understandings of scripture, and yet all seem to be seeing different and conflicting things, the natural question arises - has ANYONE been led by the Spirit in inuderstanding the scriptures over the course of the last 2,000 years? We can even extend this back further as it seems as though no one seemed to recognize the appearance or necessary work of the Christ 2,000 years ago based upon OT scriptures, even though He says in the gospels that those scriptures pointed towards Him and His work for that time.

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 07:17 PM
There is only one truth. However,I think the reason we all see different perspectives is because of doctrinal programming and worldly desires.We set these things up as "idols" in our heart.
It is interesting that God told the Israelites that if they inquired of him through a prophet when they had an idol in their heart he would actually speak to them according to the idol. I think the same thing happens when we read the scriptures with an impure heart. We see what we want to see.

Ezk 14:4 Therefore speak unto them, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Every man of the house of Israel that setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the LORD will answer him that cometh according to the multitude of his idols;

This is one of the best scriptures that could have been referenced in regards to this very discussion. But the question that arises from here is - what exactly defines an "impure heart" when reading the scriptures? Does that mean we should conclude that all of Christianity has impure heards since everyone seems to be seeing different things in the scriptures - or is there more to it than that?

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 07:22 PM
No. I mean some things are very clear. Such as...

Thou shalt not kill.
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Thou shalt not steal.

And...

Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; (1 Timothy 1:15)

On the surface, that may seem to be the case, but with deeper thought, just how "very clear" are these things?

For example, how clear is the command "Thou shalt not kill/murder" when the same Yahweh who gave that command also gave the command to kill/murder elsewhere in OT scripture?

Servant89
Jul 5th 2011, 08:46 PM
Does anyone agree with that statement?

It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19), and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth. It could shed new light on what the Christ speaks in John chapter 9:

John 9
4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

What does everyone think about this? Is what we call the "bible" a sealed up book whose true meanings have not yet been revealed to man? Has it been "night time" for the last 2,000 years?

Things dont change at all.

Adam... what happened? The woman that you gave me Lord, it is your fault and her fault.

Eve... what happened? The devil made me do it, it was not my fault.

Today is DNA made me do it... etc.

Now is, God wrote a confusing book and no one can figure it out, it is all his fault.

I have news for you all .... God is not the God of confusion.... the reason why there are many views is because people made up their mind before reading the book and when the Bible is in violent disagreement with their position, they chose to nullify the word of God and make it null and void of no effect using their human understanding. They give more credit to their theology than the word of God. Jesus put it like this:

John 8:43: Why is it that you cant undertstand what I am saying? It is because you cannot receive my words, that's why.

It has nothing to do with IQs or God being unclear. God will judge us by his written word (John 12:47-48), it is a good word to judge us, it is crystal clear. But the god of this world (satan) has blinded the minds of the people that go to hell so that they can not see the light of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

When people chose to teach as doctrines, commandments of men, God gets very upset, and reacts by blinding that group from seeing the obvious.

Isa 29:10 For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.
11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Peace

We Are
Jul 5th 2011, 08:55 PM
Here is the first place I recognize that our spirits will part, We are. But only if you are actually offering this to postulate some new teaching. I hope you are only tossing it out there for our consideration, meaning: you are open to consider correction.
And this paragraph quoted above is the one I mentioned in my earlier post with the panoramic example of where I see you taking the path that leads you and many, many others to have so many divisions in what should be unity in His "truth"/His words.

Granted that there is more symbolism behind "mana" in the context you presented it but, that is a whole different library of discussion.
So, please just let me say this about it: Christ spoke of Himself as various food stuffs, not just as mana, and if a creature only considers one of the many examples in Father's recorded words when Christ spoke comparing Himself to food stuffs in this way, then that creature is not going to understand "truth" and will indeed end up having a subjective interpretation of that passage and any and all passages approached in the same way, which is not going bring "truth" but the creature will remain in a position void of understanding of what Christ is teaching when He portrays Himself as food stuffs to those who will feed on Him.
I will not share with you those passages in our bible where else He portrays Himself as food stuffs to those who will feed on Him in hopes of teaching you,
I am not a teacher but His disciple and a servant to His friends, who like me search for and diligently seek Him in His words and not just seek Him/His "truth" in a selected passage, chapter or verse, but in the whole of Father's words.
I have learned (and will share below how) that if and when I was or am finally willing to learn of Him first, at His feet, then He will reveal to me everything that He knows I need to know and understand.
But, I can't just find His truth in one selected verse or passage or even a single book in His word.
I have to seek and search for Him in what He and I both call: diligently seeking Him, seeking Him in all of His/His Father's words, not just picking and choosing which passages and verses as you do here with "mana" to support your personal postulation, but I have to diligently seek and search everywhere else He speaks of Himself as food, and even searching elsewhere in scripture and new testament writings where Father speaks of food apart from His Son as a comparison, whether those searches will relate to Christ or not doesn't matter to me because Father will use all things to bless me when I show myself approved by God by my diligently seeking Him in His word this way, and I am rewarded openly with blessing to share with my brethren and the lost no matter if I find what I thought I would find or not, I still come away with what He knew I needed to know to prepare me for His purpose's' for me which is being obedient to "all" of His words to be a living example to those who may observe me and also to continue serving my brethren fruitfully by His standards of fruit and not my or my fellows standards of fruit, and to be an example and light to His lost children and to be in hope of restoring my disobedient brethren.

I agree with much of what you say above, but let me interject with a point to ponder regarding what you say here: "But, I can't just find His truth in one selected verse or passage or even a single book in His word.
I have to seek and search for Him in what He and I both call: diligently seeking Him, seeking Him in all of His/His Father's words,"

Does this not imply that unless someone understands the entire bible, then they can't understand any of it? For example, if there are passages in the bible that you do not understand that would shed greater light on or even completely change your views upon a given subject, then how can you be sure you have a proper understanding about that given subject - when you do not understand other verses in the bible that would change your views on it?



Do I know all "truth", No !
And, I do not have faith that I will while I am still in my flesh, But, I have faith and am witnessed to that I will and am prepared with the "truth" that He knows I will need to be equipped for what is coming my way and or going to pop up in my paths, always, unless I forsake Him and become and remain apostate.

Topical studies of words used by Christ is what has showed me Christ and Father's thoughts on said topics which revealed to me His truth on every thing I need now and have needed in my history and will need in my future with the Holy Spirits comfort to fulfill pleasing my Creator, which is what and why all of us were created, to please the Creator....that is the purpose of truth too, to enable us to please Him.
Take that or leave it. I am not a teacher, I am His disciple. .

What do you make of these words of the Christ spoken in John chapter 9:

39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.”
40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”
41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.


I agree to an extent but I would portray the continual revealing as a personal revealing to us individually in proportion to our growing/evolving in Him (being transformed by the renewing of our minds) individually by Him and not as a prophetic revealing as the centuries or decades pass by humanity as a whole.
But, as individual maturity in His words develops in the minds of His obedient children by their personal diligence in seeking Him to be obedient to what truth He reveals to us when we approach and effort to follow Him this way, transforming and renewing us from fallen creatures, back into Father's only begotten Son's image.
(Christ-likeness)(restoration process to the initial state of un-fallen creatures)

This personal unraveling or revealing of the depths of His "truth" to individuals is more accurately described by me as a deeper and deeper and deeper understanding of His truth and not as a "multiple, or even infinite, layers of Truth that are to be progressively revealed as time passes by". The word "multiple" just does not apply here from what I have learned of Him, from Him.
His truth is singular and He is the embodiment thereof and it is only found in Him, and not found in hand picked by men selectively chosen passages and verses nor chapters or even entire books in our bibles,it must be compared with all that He says, no picking and choosing, ignoring or dismissing any of it, it all most be weighed together as a whole to find His truth/Him.

Again, with what you say here, does this not conclude from your point of view that in order for someone to be sure that they understand ANY scripture, they must have an understanding of ALL scripture? Otherwise, how can they be sure that some of the scriptures that they don't understand would not modify or completely overhaul the beliefs they have about other scriptures that they believe they DO understand?


He/the truth is found in the whole of Father's word, eaten as a whole and not selectively portioned to fit our desires.
Again, topical studies of words used by Christ is what has showed me Christ and Father's thoughts on said topics which reveals to me deeper and deeper truth on every thing I need now and have needed in my history too, and will need in my future as well to fulfill pleasing our Creator, which is what and why all of us were created. ALL of us to please the Creator.... that is the purpose of truth too: to facilitate us pleasing Him. .




As you again allude to your belief that understanding of the truth can only come from an understanding of the entire word, then let me throw this out there for consideration - this is not something that you need to necessarily answer, just ponder.

As you mentioned above, you do not know the whole truth, and as you have mentioned many times, understanding of the truth can only come from taking into account the entire word. With that being the case, how do you think that relates to the theme of this thread? If no man has a complete understanding of the entire bible, and a complete understanding of the entire bible is needed in order to be certain that we understand ANY of the bible, what then is the only logical conclusion that is left to happen when people read the bible?




Well to me all of those examples you offer apply because all of those examples indicate imprisonment of one sort or another, and "the Son will make you free indeed" applies to all of them, so that does not support your postulation that truth is subjective to a creature's personal perspective or vantage.




The word you used here "evolved" is accurate in that it evolves as a seeker and follower of Christ is transformed/evolved into the image of Christ's example to us. (Growth is the word I would use) But this growth only happens when the seeker decides to diligently seek and follow what He reveals to us as we seek Him.
Diligently seeking Him to the extreme: as an ongoing process and not diligently seeking what we think we need to know or understand, but totally subjecting ourselves to Him by seeking Him in His words all of His words, and not seeking what we think we need to find in His words for our understanding....

It is to simple for most of us to accept that He rewards with the understanding of His words, when we seek ONLY Him in those words. But, this is when we will find the understanding of His words, any of them, and all of them if He allows us the time for the lived or experienced lessons.
This is where and how "absolute, objective Truth" is found, friend, but only when we find Him in His words by looking for Him there and not looking for the understanding of portions of His words. Yeah I already know... it is to simple and uncomplicated to be practical for those who would rather debate or postulate on single passages and verses they desire to scatter their understanding among their fellows in an effort to define their subjective truth.
He is found in His words, that was made clear to me, and when we find Him, He will give us all understanding that is defined by His purpose, corrections, fulfillment, work and example to us, the truth, Him, that is where it is found.
One either understands that or they wish to obstinately and pridefully understand only what they desire to understand. But as you pointed out earlier it only becomes subjective truth, and objective truth will never raise its beautiful head in that environment, I promise you.
A good long read in the book of Ecclesiastes and or Proverbs would profit someone who cannot digest this.

Great points, but again, how do we solve the dilemma of two dilligently seeking Christians coming to two opposing conclusions of a theological issue, both of whom are convinced that God has shown them the "objective truth" on the issue? The OSAS/NOSAS debate is the first and most obvious that comes to mind. I haven't come across too many folks on either side of that debate who are not convinced that God has shown them the absolute objective truth on the issue.




Yeah I have noticed,
But, I will not quote scripture or new testament writings to teach "truth" to you or others, UNLESS you inquire of the purpose, identity and work of Christ, because you and anyone with the means and opportunity to post or read here do have the same opportunity as I have to diligently seek Him in His word, giving Him the opportunity to give the truth to us that you so eloquently communicate is so fleeting from you and as you postulate: fleeting from everyone else too.
I agree many, but not everyone !
It has found me We Are,
and I will never let it go, even if my leg is pushed out of socket, or am hung on a cross upside down, or thrown into a king's oven, or fed to a kings beasts... Yeah I know: over dramatic, but so true.

You show a great devotion to your quest for the kingdom! It seems you have most obviously dedicated a great deal of time and effort to your spiritual growth. I, like you, do not like to use scriptures to teach or "convince" anyone of anything. I merely like to offer certain ones for people to ponder based on any given related discussion. How do you think what you say above relates to the passages from John chapter 9 that I posted earlier?

Also, as you think back on your entire spiritual journey thus far and all the things you've learned along the way as you have sincerely sought the truth, what do you make of the following passage - which deals not with something that happened long ago, but pertains to the end of the age, just prior to the coming of the Kingdom:

Luke 21
5 Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”

When reading the above passage, keep in mind this NT passage as well:

1 Corinthians 6
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?


I almost totally agree here, and I make that same point often to those who approach me in humility as you have done. But, I follow up with: well you need to seek Him in His word to find the real Him/truth. You just will not find Him anymore in the words spoke of Him by any mans description, but only find Him by the Holy Spirits amplification of Him when you feed on and seek Him diligently in His Father's recorded words.
WE Are, that is where you will find objective truth.

How will the lost ever find Him/objective truth if everyone says:"truth is subjective to personal interpretation" Someone must point to Him for the lost to find "objective truth" as Christ and His Father describe/define it.
My definition of truth is lacking and still evolving/growing daily too as I grow in Him.
But my knowledge, familiarity and understanding of the opportunity to be restored by and through Him is not lacking, And I will quote those bible passages anywhere and at time at any mans request, because He commands, prepares and equips His obedient children to do that.




I suggest comparing this with other places in our bibles where these words are used and maybe even study of the short book of Jude too, and the apocrypha's book of Esdras also if it is available to you for a deeper and deeper understanding of this subject: night-darkness ... days-times-seasons of drought or darkness.




If you start a separate thread on this single topic I would be happy to share on it, but starting a new thread with-out your postulation of truth being subjective... because I have shared here with you all that I see is needed to share with a wise creature on that postulation, until or unless my Master reminds or shares with me more about it.



The closer you get to Him in this way, the closer He will get to you We Are, by drawing you closer to His only begotten Son... (revealing the objective truth to you)
I am here to share and witness that to you personally.
That is where and how we find His objective truth.



Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

It's great to converse with someone who obviously takes the time to thoroughly think things through and ponder deeper aspects of the kingdom. I have not done much studying of the apocryphal books but am certainly open to this. I do agree with much of what you say, perhaps even all of it! But at the same time I disagree with it as well. This may seem like a strange equation, but I can assure you that's the case. But then again, with the theme of this topic being what it is, that may not be a surprise!

MoreMercy
Jul 6th 2011, 01:00 AM
I agree with much of what you say above, but let me interject with a point to ponder regarding what you say here: "But, I can't just find His truth in one selected verse or passage or even a single book in His word.
I have to seek and search for Him in what He and I both call: diligently seeking Him, seeking Him in all of His/His Father's words,"

Does this not imply that unless someone understands the entire bible, then they can't understand any of it? For example, if there are passages in the bible that you do not understand that would shed greater light on or even completely change your views upon a given subject, then how can you be sure you have a proper understanding about that given subject - when you do not understand other verses in the bible that would change your views on it?




What do you make of these words of the Christ spoken in John chapter 9:

39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.”
40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”
41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.



Again, with what you say here, does this not conclude from your point of view that in order for someone to be sure that they understand ANY scripture, they must have an understanding of ALL scripture? Otherwise, how can they be sure that some of the scriptures that they don't understand would not modify or completely overhaul the beliefs they have about other scriptures that they believe they DO understand?






As you again allude to your belief that understanding of the truth can only come from an understanding of the entire word, then let me throw this out there for consideration - this is not something that you need to necessarily answer, just ponder.

As you mentioned above, you do not know the whole truth, and as you have mentioned many times, understanding of the truth can only come from taking into account the entire word. With that being the case, how do you think that relates to the theme of this thread? If no man has a complete understanding of the entire bible, and a complete understanding of the entire bible is needed in order to be certain that we understand ANY of the bible, what then is the only logical conclusion that is left to happen when people read the bible?





Great points, but again, how do we solve the dilemma of two dilligently seeking Christians coming to two opposing conclusions of a theological issue, both of whom are convinced that God has shown them the "objective truth" on the issue? The OSAS/NOSAS debate is the first and most obvious that comes to mind. I haven't come across too many folks on either side of that debate who are not convinced that God has shown them the absolute objective truth on the issue.





You show a great devotion to your quest for the kingdom! It seems you have most obviously dedicated a great deal of time and effort to your spiritual growth. I, like you, do not like to use scriptures to teach or "convince" anyone of anything. I merely like to offer certain ones for people to ponder based on any given related discussion. How do you think what you say above relates to the passages from John chapter 9 that I posted earlier?

Also, as you think back on your entire spiritual journey thus far and all the things you've learned along the way as you have sincerely sought the truth, what do you make of the following passage - which deals not with something that happened long ago, but pertains to the end of the age, just prior to the coming of the Kingdom:

Luke 21
5 Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”

When reading the above passage, keep in mind this NT passage as well:

1 Corinthians 6
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?



It's great to converse with someone who obviously takes the time to thoroughly think things through and ponder deeper aspects of the kingdom. I have not done much studying of the apocryphal books but am certainly open to this. I do agree with much of what you say, perhaps even all of it! But at the same time I disagree with it as well. This may seem like a strange equation, but I can assure you that's the case. But then again, with the theme of this topic being what it is, that may not be a surprise!

Howdy We Are,
It may take me another 24 hours to compose a reply, I want to say that I think I maybe catching your drift now (maybe) on subjective "truth" but want to emphasize: that it does not have to be that way at all.

And I will try again to explain why it does not have to be that way, and how it is possible to know His objective truth.

Also, that we need not understand the "entire" bible to posses it it either, as you assume that is what I shared earlier here.
...We don't ...We can ! ...But, few will !


Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

the rookie
Jul 6th 2011, 01:20 AM
This certainly seems to be the case, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 13:

12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

It seems to me that the church body as a whole, would be wise to perhaps dedicate more time and effort in unifying itself (cleaning the inside of the dish, removing the plank from its own eye, etc) than on evangelizing to the world, as all of the divisions and even violent disagreements down through the ages have caused the body of Christ to become marred to the point that it has left the true Christ unrecognizable to the rest of the world. (Isaiah 53)

That's outrageous, and not at all what Paul had in mind when he wrote that part of the letter. In fact, the whole point of this section (1 Cor. 12-14) was maturity in love that establishes order through humility for the sake of unbelievers - that Christ would be exalted in their midst, not man or their gifts. 1 Cor. 13:12 is about love, and knowing and being known by one another.

It seems as if, by the manner in which you've butchered Is. 53 and used it as a pretext to call for the cessation of evangelism that, at this point, you're just trying to rile folks up. It's a bit silly and not really loyal to the heart or word of Jesus at all.

the rookie
Jul 6th 2011, 01:24 AM
Looking at the current state of the church body and the history of it down through the ages, all the way back to the time when Paul opposed Peter "to his face" in front of the whole assembly (in direct disobedience to the teaching of the Messiah about correcting a brother in private), does it really seem as though the church body of Christ is in "agreement with humility as one body unified in Him?"

I have much more confidence in the leadership of Christ and His ability to bring this to pass than you do, I think - and apparently, so did Paul when he wrote the words.

Which, I believe, were inspired by the same Holy Spirit whose power and ministry is the key to a "spotless, blameless Bride" equally yoked with Christ and mature in devotion and doctrine, as Ephesians 4 and 5 describe.

shepherdsword
Jul 6th 2011, 01:34 AM
Originally Posted by We Are
This certainly seems to be the case, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 13:

12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

It seems to me that the church body as a whole, would be wise to perhaps dedicate more time and effort in unifying itself (cleaning the inside of the dish, removing the plank from its own eye, etc) than on evangelizing to the world, as all of the divisions and even violent disagreements down through the ages have caused the body of Christ to become marred to the point that it has left the true Christ unrecognizable to the rest of the world. (Isaiah 53)


I can see your point here. Jesus said all men would know we are his disciples by our love for one another. He prayed that we might be one even as He and the Father are one.There is plenty of evangelizing going on that is nothing more than some method taught by a religious system. If people could see broken humble people that loved each other it would do wonders for the christian witness. I am not saying evangelizing should stop and I don't think you are either. I just think we should have something to offer a new convert besides a life of sitting in a church pew and throwing in his 10%. Some reality,love and purpose.
If we evangelize in Jesus' name and then laid down our lives for those we help lead to the Lord then we would then be fulfilling the great commission in reality and not just getting another notch on our spiritual gun handle. Just my opinion.

MoreMercy
Jul 6th 2011, 11:16 AM
I agree with much of what you say above, but let me interject with a point to ponder regarding what you say here: "But, I can't just find His truth in one selected verse or passage or even a single book in His word.
I have to seek and search for Him in what He and I both call: diligently seeking Him, seeking Him in all of His/His Father's words,"
Does this not imply that unless someone understands the entire bible, then they can't understand any of it? For example, if there are passages in the bible that you do not understand that would shed greater light on or even completely change your views upon a given subject, then how can you be sure you have a proper understanding about that given subject - when you do not understand other verses in the bible that would change your views on it?
No, you are picking and choosing portions of what I shared.
You choose to ignore pre and post portions of what I communicated to you, in favor of quoting only portions that will quasi fit or support your postulation, that is the same thing men do with Father's word which brings them subjective understanding and no truth at all.

I am not going to quote myself to you here, you can just go back and read it again but paying attention to what I shared just prior to the portion you quoted and just after where you quoted, or don't. I did my part... Christ and His Father are the only Ones I will jump through hoops for, unless a fellow creature ask about Christ, His identity, purpose or work done, then I will jump through hoops to share that with them.






What do you make of these words of the Christ spoken in John chapter 9:
39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.”
40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”
41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.How do you think what you say above relates to the passages from John
chapter 9 that I posted earlier?
Jesus was referencing the leaders of Israel's, the cultural and religious elite. The only ones who could read and some write also and for the most part the only ones with direct and personal access to Father's recorded words in the time when Christ walked the land (the pharisees and Sadducees) who could see/read for themselves His Father's recorded words and were the only ones in an establish traditional position to teach the people (who could not read for themselves). Which put them in a circumstantial position to abuse the people and also lead them to their own selfish advantage and they were also in a position to effort to stifle Christ work of liberating said people, by denying them the truth which Christ brought into the world to liberate them from being in spiritual bondage to their cultural and religious teachers/leaders.

Yes, there are to many to ignore modern parallels with our current cultural and religious leadership today, but I will not elaborate further than that.





Great points, but again, how do we solve the dilemma of two dilligently seeking Christians coming to two opposing conclusions of a theological issue, both of whom are convinced that God has shown them the "objective truth" on the issue?

The OSAS/NOSAS debate is the first and most obvious that comes to mind. I haven't come across too many folks on either side of that debate who are not convinced that God has shown them the absolute objective truth on the issue.
When I finally began to study the bible to find His mind in it, I found The One doctrine(singular)
Where prior when I studied the bible I studied it to find out if this or that doctrine fit or agreed with other doctrine's' about God, and what I ended up with is (theology/doctrines)Doctrine's'(plural) as apposed to doctrine(singular)

When I come or go to study Father's word with the intent to validate one doctrine in effort to dismiss another doctrine, I will come away with subjective truth.

When I come or go to study Father's word with the intent to find my Master and His Father's mind, thoughts and methods, I will come away with objective truth. a single doctrine and not doctrine's'(plural)






Again, with what you say here, does this not conclude from your point of view that in order for someone to be sure that they understand ANY scripture, they must have an understanding of ALL scripture? Otherwise, how can they be sure that some of the scriptures that they don't understand would not modify or completely overhaul the beliefs they have about other scriptures that they believe they DO understand?

As you again allude to your belief that understanding of the truth can only come from an understanding of the entire word, then let me throw this out there for consideration - this is not something that you need to necessarily answer, just ponder.

As you mentioned above, you do not know the whole truth, and as you have mentioned many times, understanding of the truth can only come from taking into account the entire word. With that being the case, how do you think that relates to the theme of this thread? If no man has a complete understanding of the entire bible, and a complete understanding of the entire bible is needed in order to be certain that we understand ANY of the bible, what then is the only logical conclusion that is left to happen when people read the bible?
No, I do not need to understand the entire bible to find His objective truth, and I think the only way that you read this into what I shared with you in my earlier post is that you are just overlooking or ignoring them for your own reasons and purpose.
And in my opinion: is the same reason or cause as to why you also see Father's words and effort to present to others too that: His truth is subjective.

I redundantly explained this in my prior post in almost every paragraph if not all of them that I posted in reply to you:
If/when I lack understanding on any topic/subject found in our bibles, all I need to do is seek Christ and or Father's mind on that topic/subject.
I do this by finding everywhere in Father's word this subject or topic is mentioned< I do that exhaustively and exclusively to the word used that defines that subject or topic by initially taking the first English word, then find the Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew word it was translated from, then find using a concordance with call numbers everywhere else in the entire bible that this Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek word is used and read what Father, and or Christ thinks feels and says about it. Then I compile all of those into what I am having trouble understanding and *poof* it is revealed to me, I have not found it but it is revealed to me. It finds me when I seek Christ and His Father's mind on any subject or topic recorded in His and His Father's words, allowing Him the opportunity to reveal His objective truth to me.
Note: I did not find it, He revealed it to me when I diligently seek His mind on it/the subject.
But, not just seeking His mind in one verse or one chapter or even one entire book in His words on the subject or topic, but seeking every single word He spoke on the subject or topic. (seeking Him/His mind) His thoughts and feelings, His suggestions and commands related to that subject or topic.







You show a great devotion to your quest for the kingdom! It seems you have most obviously dedicated a great deal of time and effort to your spiritual growth.
Well I appreciate the compliment but I would put it this way:
I devote a lot of time and energy in quest to fining what my Lord and His Father think, say, feel, suggest and command of their creations.
And that by default is what brings spiritual growth to me, with out any intent of my own but by default when I seek Him in His word's and not when I seek understanding or answers which I desire to have or posses.
And I believe that is the single point that I make that you are either overlooking, or are intentionally ignoring...

Seeking Him, and only Him in His word, and not seeking what we desire to find or have answers to or understanding of, this is when He gives or reveals TRUTH, truth is not found ! It is REVEALED !
Revealed in His word by Him when we seek only Him in His words.
Objective truth will never raise its beautiful head to anyone until they seek Him and only Him in His word.... I tried to express that in almost if not every paragraph that I have posted directly to you in each of my post on this thread.






I, like you, do not like to use scriptures to teach or "convince" anyone of anything.
Good for you friend, I think quoting scripture and or new testament letters and writings is a practice best saved for our modern pharisees.
I now almost always refuse to quote Father's word when requested with very few exceptions such as: quoting new testament and old testament passages to reveal Christ identity, purpose and work done. I will quote bibles passages for that purpose and a very few other reasons.






Also, as you think back on your entire spiritual journey thus far and all the things you've learned along the way as you have sincerely sought the truth, what do you make of the following passage - which deals not with something that happened long ago, but pertains to the end of the age, just prior to the coming of the Kingdom:

Luke 21
5 Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said, 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”When reading the above passage, keep in mind this NT passage as well:

1 Corinthians 6
19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?
In Luke 21:
I will have to double check this to be sure but, just off the cuff I recall this to be spoke by Christ along with other events in the same chapter as future identifying events that will be signs of His second coming.

1 Corinthians 6:
Is speaking of standards for/of behaviors and inter-relational practices within the body of believers. To keep individuals which are His temple (by His own definition) to keep them in a state of acceptable use for His purpose's'.






It's great to converse with someone who obviously takes the time to thoroughly think things through and ponder deeper aspects of the kingdom.

I know this for sure, friend: We all of us who are blessed with the opportunity and the desire, can do the same thing.
The only requirement I have found besides being given the opportunity and the desire: Is to seek Him in His word and not seek in His word what we desire to know or understand, when we do that He will reveal to us all of what we need to understand and know to prepare us with what ever comes our way or what ever pops up in our paths.






I have not done much studying of the apocryphal books but am certainly open to this.
I know I suggested this in my earlier post to you, but:
I do not recommend everyone to do this. There are good reasons why these book were not canonized. Not saying they are evil or misleading books but just that they are difficult to understand with out first knowing as much of His and His Father's mind by seeking what they say, feel, think, suggest and command in our bibles and giving them the opportunity to reveal themselves to us, They know best what we need revealed to us by them. And that will prepare us for anything coming our way, we must be 'pre'pared...






I do agree with much of what you say, perhaps even all of it! But at the same time I disagree with it as well. This may seem like a strange equation, but I can assure you that's the case. But then again, with the theme of this topic being what it is, that may not be a surprise!

Yes, it is not a surprised to me, this may appear condescending to you, but: I have been where you are and still am too in many, many ways but it is a process which is commonly called:
"the renewing of our minds" It is a process, it does not come with a *poof* affect or any instant dramatic revelations but, over a period of time in diligently seeking only Him in His words and not seeking what we desire to find or understand in His words.






PS:
If I have or am beginning to come across in my communication to you as indifferent or frustrated I apologize now, but I have a suggestion for you to be better served by His friends and our fellow servants:
When or if you wish to discuss this subject of "selective or subjective truth" in the future.
If you desire responses that will be profitable for both parties and the readers then I suggest you use the words:
"selective or subjective understanding" (Not subjective truth, but subjective understanding of the truth)
You will be received in a more generous and humble way by those who do have understanding and are willing to share it.

Promoting or postulating the idea that there is no objective truth in His words will only alienate you further from the beauty of the understanding of said objective truth.



Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 01:11 PM
I disagree with the statement, because the statement asserts that the Bible is unusual with respect to its form, i.e. "in such a way", which implies that it deviates from the usual way. While it's true that the Bible is inspired writing, it reads like any other written document. In my experience, while I find that the Bible takes effort to read, it is NOT enigmatic or mysterious.

I think an objective review of the history of denominations and why they form will reveal that it was not the supposed enigmatic nature of the scriptures that fragments the churches, but other things such as empire building, the idolatry of popular personalities, the movement toward humanism, and other things such as these.

I would offer that all of these reasons you mention can be stripped down, at their lowest level, to be revealed as disagreements over what is truth.


I'm not convinced that OSAS or pre-trib are that old. But even so, I think the locus of disagreements are due, not for the suppose reason that the Bible is enigmatic, but are due to the fact that we bring our own presuppositions, philosophies, worldviews, and a-priori assumptions to the text. And as we tend to invest these with our emotions and subjectivity, it takes time for us to let them go.

The question is - what is the difference? If we as mankind naturally bring our own presuppositions to the text, and the bible is written to and for mankind, is it not accurate to say the bible is written in such a way that mankind will see whatever they wish?


This is certainly a logical possibility. But then, if this were actually a fact, we would never know. If one can not know the truth, then one can not convince others of such a thing. First of all, I can not argue that no one can know the truth unless I make an exception for my own views. And even if I were bold enough to suggest that I was the only one who knew the truth, if I argue that you can't know the truth, then I am a fool for attempting to make the argument.

Well of course the huge problem with all of this, and the conclusion that we don't want to face is this: If everyone sees the bible differently and no two people agree about everything, then an individual is left to pick from one of two choices - either nobody can see the objective truth and we all just hold opinions, or we as that one individual are the only one who can see the truth and everyone else is blind. Neither conclusion is one that we will be comfortable with.


But we don't live in THAT world. We live and act as if we CAN know the truth and that we CAN learn the truth and that the truth CAN be taught. That is where we actually live; the Western view that the truth is knowable makes sense in the real world where we all live.

Ahhh, but there is a difference between saying we CAN know the truth and we DO know the truth. I agree with the fact that we should not stop seeking because we CAN know the truth, but does that give us the right to act as if we DO know the truth to the unbelieving world?


It does not follow that if we find disagreement among people that the real, actual, truth can't be known. The fact that disagreement and debate is found among men does not logically lead to the conclusion that the world is incomprehensible; and the fact that Christian men and woman disagree about doctrine or the interpretation of various passages of scripture does not logically lead to the idea that the Bible is incomprehensible or enigmatic or that we have been living in nighttime for 2000 years.

Again, this deals with "can" and "do." If we leave open the idea that different doctrinal interpretations amongst believers implies that some of us are wrong and the possibility that we are ALL wrong, how do we justify having the right to share what may or may not be the truth with the rest of the world, and passing it off as truth? I'm not saying we don't have the right; I'm asking how we justify it.

RollTide21
Jul 6th 2011, 02:31 PM
The fact is, none of us can be "sure" about this yet, as it has not been fully carried out yet. We know that there will be many on that day who will say "Lord, Lord," but of course, who among us is going to want to believe that we may be one of those people? Who wants to consider the possibility that they may be one of the ones who says "when did we see you hungry and not feed you" before being cast into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels?

And yet, as is clearly taught, a great many are going to be taken by surprise by these things on that day. Clearly, there will be many who believed they were saved from the punishment to come who are not in fact saved from it.

This should keep us seeking, but not out of fear or compulsion. The number one obstacle to spiritual growth is fear.The Holy Spirit testifies in our hearts that we belong to Christ. We can be sure of right standing with God by the indwelling of the Spirit. We can be as sure as we need to be.

BroRog
Jul 6th 2011, 03:54 PM
I would offer that all of these reasons you mention can be stripped down, at their lowest level, to be revealed as disagreements over what is truth.You would? I don't think so. Fatal skepticism is a modern concept. Those men who split off of the Catholic Church at the time of the Reformation all shared a common idea: the truth was knowable.


The question is - what is the difference? If we as mankind naturally bring our own presuppositions to the text, and the bible is written to and for mankind, is it not accurate to say the bible is written in such a way that mankind will see whatever they wish?
Only at first and only at the initial reading. But motivated, dedicated Bible students will not stop until he or she has come to understand what the Bible actually intends to say. Such Bible students are aware of your concern and are learning the skills necessary to avoid that mistake. Such dedicated Bible students discipline themselves against seeing what they want to see.


Well of course the huge problem with all of this, and the conclusion that we don't want to face is this: If everyone sees the bible differently and no two people agree about everything, then an individual is left to pick from one of two choices - either nobody can see the objective truth and we all just hold opinions, or we as that one individual are the only one who can see the truth and everyone else is blind. Neither conclusion is one that we will be comfortable with.Of course, I do not accept either of those alternatives. Your pessimistic view of hermeneutics might change once you have learned the skills of exegesis and were able to successfully arrive at the objective meaning of the text yourself. I recommend reading "The Language of God: a common sense approach to understanding and applying the Bible" by Ron Julian, J A Crabtree and David Crabtree http://www.amazon.com/Language-God-Ron-Julian/dp/1576832767 if it is still available in print. This book takes the reader through the process of interpreting various passages, demonstrating the principles of sound exegesis.


Ahhh, but there is a difference between saying we CAN know the truth and we DO know the truth. I agree with the fact that we should not stop seeking because we CAN know the truth, but does that give us the right to act as if we DO know the truth to the unbelieving world?
Yes, we should be honest with ourselves and the world. It is a little dishonest, in my opinion, to say we don't know the truth when we think we do. Humility demands that I admit that I could be wrong, but honesty demands that I also admit that I wouldn't tell you what I think unless I thought it was true.


Again, this deals with "can" and "do." If we leave open the idea that different doctrinal interpretations amongst believers implies that some of us are wrong and the possibility that we are ALL wrong, how do we justify having the right to share what may or may not be the truth with the rest of the world, and passing it off as truth? I'm not saying we don't have the right; I'm asking how we justify it.We justify it the same way we justify feeding the poor, or helping the needy. For me, sharing the truth with others is an act of love. Do I have the "right" to love another person? I would say that no only do I have a right, I have an obligation to love others as God and Jesus loved me. And just as God, in his mercy and love, shared the truth with me, I share the truth with others who want to hear it.

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 04:15 PM
Things dont change at all.

Adam... what happened? The woman that you gave me Lord, it is your fault and her fault.

Eve... what happened? The devil made me do it, it was not my fault.

Today is DNA made me do it... etc.

Now is, God wrote a confusing book and no one can figure it out, it is all his fault.

I have news for you all .... God is not the God of confusion.... the reason why there are many views is because people made up their mind before reading the book and when the Bible is in violent disagreement with their position, they chose to nullify the word of God and make it null and void of no effect using their human understanding. They give more credit to their theology than the word of God. Jesus put it like this:

John 8:43: Why is it that you cant undertstand what I am saying? It is because you cannot receive my words, that's why.

It has nothing to do with IQs or God being unclear. God will judge us by his written word (John 12:47-48), it is a good word to judge us, it is crystal clear. But the god of this world (satan) has blinded the minds of the people that go to hell so that they can not see the light of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

When people chose to teach as doctrines, commandments of men, God gets very upset, and reacts by blinding that group from seeing the obvious.

Isa 29:10 For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.
11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:
12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.
13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Peace

I certainly agree that differing doctrines exist because people read with preconceived ideas.

A question worthy of deep consideration, however, is this: Is it even possible to open up the bible without absolutely ANY preconceived ideas whatsoever?

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 04:25 PM
That's outrageous, and not at all what Paul had in mind when he wrote that part of the letter. In fact, the whole point of this section (1 Cor. 12-14) was maturity in love that establishes order through humility for the sake of unbelievers - that Christ would be exalted in their midst, not man or their gifts. 1 Cor. 13:12 is about love, and knowing and being known by one another.

It seems as if, by the manner in which you've butchered Is. 53 and used it as a pretext to call for the cessation of evangelism that, at this point, you're just trying to rile folks up. It's a bit silly and not really loyal to the heart or word of Jesus at all.

I'm not sure why you think it to be outrageous that it would be of great value for the church body to unite as one, drop the denominations (many of which consist of names that belong to mere men) and come together in unity as Yahshua prayed just a short time before His time of suffering came about.

Again, do you think it's outrageous that perhaps Christ's church body is paralleled with His physical body, having worn a blindfold while being told to prophesy, and a crown of thorns on His head (symbolizing being led by earthly thinking and concerns as taught in the parable of the sower), and was in hades (meaning "to not see") for either two nights or longer depending on which gospel we read?

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 04:29 PM
I have much more confidence in the leadership of Christ and His ability to bring this to pass than you do, I think - and apparently, so did Paul when he wrote the words.

Which, I believe, were inspired by the same Holy Spirit whose power and ministry is the key to a "spotless, blameless Bride" equally yoked with Christ and mature in devotion and doctrine, as Ephesians 4 and 5 describe.

Okay, the bride will be presented as spotless and blameless, but what about the body? Can anyone honestly say the body of Christ, which dates back to the time of Paul who first coined that phrase, has been spotless and blameless down through the centuries?

the rookie
Jul 6th 2011, 05:18 PM
I'm not sure why you think it to be outrageous that it would be of great value for the church body to unite as one, drop the denominations (many of which consist of names that belong to mere men) and come together in unity as Yahshua prayed just a short time before His time of suffering came about.

How is that possible with the subjectivity that you propose is the absolute?

Secondly, you are misunderstanding me. I don't find "unity" outrageous, in fact, I long for the day it is expressed on the earth in answer the prayer of Jesus at the end of John 17. The day of the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God - the day of the maturity of the church worldwide - will be a day of explosive and historically effective evangelism. What I find "outrageous" is your statement calling for the church to draw back from evangelism until that day. That was more than outrageous, it was unbiblical sentimentalism masking itself in spiritual language.


Again, do you think it's outrageous that perhaps Christ's church body is paralleled with His physical body, having worn a blindfold while being told to prophesy, and a crown of thorns on His head (symbolizing being led by earthly thinking and concerns as taught in the parable of the sower), and was in hades (meaning "to not see") for either two nights or longer depending on which gospel we read?

"Perhaps". You have no hermeneutical foundation to make such a symbolic interpretive leap.

the rookie
Jul 6th 2011, 05:19 PM
Okay, the bride will be presented as spotless and blameless, but what about the body? Can anyone honestly say the body of Christ, which dates back to the time of Paul who first coined that phrase, has been spotless and blameless down through the centuries?

I'd take caution related to how you speak of another Man's wife. She may be messy to you, but She's beautiful to Him.

And no, your question was neither my premise nor my point.

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 05:39 PM
I can see your point here. Jesus said all men would know we are his disciples by our love for one another. He prayed that we might be one even as He and the Father are one.There is plenty of evangelizing going on that is nothing more than some method taught by a religious system. If people could see broken humble people that loved each other it would do wonders for the christian witness. I am not saying evangelizing should stop and I don't think you are either. I just think we should have something to offer a new convert besides a life of sitting in a church pew and throwing in his 10%. Some reality,love and purpose.
If we evangelize in Jesus' name and then laid down our lives for those we help lead to the Lord then we would then be fulfilling the great commission in reality and not just getting another notch on our spiritual gun handle. Just my opinion.

I believe this is a great post and a great outlook! It would take, however, an unprecedented amount of humility in order for the entire body to lay down their differenced and come together as one. Will it happen? Time will tell...

fewarechosen
Jul 6th 2011, 05:43 PM
at first i thought this was a easy question. then i realiized the pharisees had scripture. they read it they taught it they proclaimed to everyone how it was supposed to be. then Christ came and they even tried to tell him they knew what was right.


so they saw something in scripture vastly different than what Christ did.

remember Christ said it would get even worse, what are we 2000+ years down the line. just like the pharisees did back then the preachers/teachers do even worse today.

people still want to put their faith in man rather than God, lots of false teachers, blind leading the blind.

so to answer can people see whatever they wish within ? I do believe so, the children of the devil thought they saw in scripture a reason to want Christ dead. So if someone can see that in scripture I suppose almost anything else can be seen.

this is how you find 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.

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 11:31 PM
No, you are picking and choosing portions of what I shared.
You choose to ignore pre and post portions of what I communicated to you, in favor of quoting only portions that will quasi fit or support your postulation, that is the same thing men do with Father's word which brings them subjective understanding and no truth at all.

Actually I wasn't picking and choosing portions; as I said, I agree with most of your post. I was merely trying to figure out how we don't conclude, based upon what you said, that in order to be sure we understand anything in scripture we must understand all of it.


I am not going to quote myself to you here, you can just go back and read it again but paying attention to what I shared just prior to the portion you quoted and just after where you quoted, or don't. I did my part... Christ and His Father are the only Ones I will jump through hoops for, unless a fellow creature ask about Christ, His identity, purpose or work done, then I will jump through hoops to share that with them. .

No hoop jumping necessary here!






Jesus was referencing the leaders of Israel's, the cultural and religious elite. The only ones who could read and some write also and for the most part the only ones with direct and personal access to Father's recorded words in the time when Christ walked the land (the pharisees and Sadducees) who could see/read for themselves His Father's recorded words and were the only ones in an establish traditional position to teach the people (who could not read for themselves). Which put them in a circumstantial position to abuse the people and also lead them to their own selfish advantage and they were also in a position to effort to stifle Christ work of liberating said people, by denying them the truth which Christ brought into the world to liberate them from being in spiritual bondage to their cultural and religious teachers/leaders.

Yes, there are to many to ignore modern parallels with our current cultural and religious leadership today, but I will not elaborate further than that. .


So you don't believe that all words of the Christ can apply to every individual?




When I finally began to study the bible to find His mind in it, I found The One doctrine(singular)
Where prior when I studied the bible I studied it to find out if this or that doctrine fit or agreed with other doctrine's' about God, and what I ended up with is (theology/doctrines)Doctrine's'(plural) as apposed to doctrine(singular)

When I come or go to study Father's word with the intent to validate one doctrine in effort to dismiss another doctrine, I will come away with subjective truth.

When I come or go to study Father's word with the intent to find my Master and His Father's mind, thoughts and methods, I will come away with objective truth. a single doctrine and not doctrine's'(plural)





No, I do not need to understand the entire bible to find His objective truth, and I think the only way that you read this into what I shared with you in my earlier post is that you are just overlooking or ignoring them for your own reasons and purpose.
And in my opinion: is the same reason or cause as to why you also see Father's words and effort to present to others too that: His truth is subjective. .

Well some of this doesn't get us very far, because I could also say to you that the only reasons you don't agree with the things I'm saying is because you are overlooking or ignoring things that I offer for your own reasons and purpose. But I'm not saying that. What I am saying, however, is that however "right" you are convinced you are about your views on scripture, there can and will be others who disagree with you who are every bit as convinved that THEY are right. Is this not, in fact, "every man doing what is right in his own eyes?"


I redundantly explained this in my prior post in almost every paragraph if not all of them that I posted in reply to you:
If/when I lack understanding on any topic/subject found in our bibles, all I need to do is seek Christ and or Father's mind on that topic/subject.
I do this by finding everywhere in Father's word this subject or topic is mentioned< I do that exhaustively and exclusively to the word used that defines that subject or topic by initially taking the first English word, then find the Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew word it was translated from, then find using a concordance with call numbers everywhere else in the entire bible that this Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek word is used and read what Father, and or Christ thinks feels and says about it. Then I compile all of those into what I am having trouble understanding and *poof* it is revealed to me, I have not found it but it is revealed to me. It finds me when I seek Christ and His Father's mind on any subject or topic recorded in His and His Father's words, allowing Him the opportunity to reveal His objective truth to me.
Note: I did not find it, He revealed it to me when I diligently seek His mind on it/the subject.
But, not just seeking His mind in one verse or one chapter or even one entire book in His words on the subject or topic, but seeking every single word He spoke on the subject or topic. (seeking Him/His mind) His thoughts and feelings, His suggestions and commands related to that subject or topic.






Well I appreciate the compliment but I would put it this way:
I devote a lot of time and energy in quest to fining what my Lord and His Father think, say, feel, suggest and command of their creations.
And that by default is what brings spiritual growth to me, with out any intent of my own but by default when I seek Him in His word's and not when I seek understanding or answers which I desire to have or posses.
And I believe that is the single point that I make that you are either overlooking, or are intentionally ignoring...

Seeking Him, and only Him in His word, and not seeking what we desire to find or have answers to or understanding of, this is when He gives or reveals TRUTH, truth is not found ! It is REVEALED !
Revealed in His word by Him when we seek only Him in His words.
Objective truth will never raise its beautiful head to anyone until they seek Him and only Him in His word.... I tried to express that in almost if not every paragraph that I have posted directly to you in each of my post on this thread.





Good for you friend, I think quoting scripture and or new testament letters and writings is a practice best saved for our modern pharisees.
I now almost always refuse to quote Father's word when requested with very few exceptions such as: quoting new testament and old testament passages to reveal Christ identity, purpose and work done. I will quote bibles passages for that purpose and a very few other reasons.





In Luke 21:
I will have to double check this to be sure but, just off the cuff I recall this to be spoke by Christ along with other events in the same chapter as future identifying events that will be signs of His second coming.

1 Corinthians 6:
Is speaking of standards for/of behaviors and inter-relational practices within the body of believers. To keep individuals which are His temple (by His own definition) to keep them in a state of acceptable use for His purpose's'.





I know this for sure, friend: We all of us who are blessed with the opportunity and the desire, can do the same thing.
The only requirement I have found besides being given the opportunity and the desire: Is to seek Him in His word and not seek in His word what we desire to know or understand, when we do that He will reveal to us all of what we need to understand and know to prepare us with what ever comes our way or what ever pops up in our paths.





I know I suggested this in my earlier post to you, but:
I do not recommend everyone to do this. There are good reasons why these book were not canonized. Not saying they are evil or misleading books but just that they are difficult to understand with out first knowing as much of His and His Father's mind by seeking what they say, feel, think, suggest and command in our bibles and giving them the opportunity to reveal themselves to us, They know best what we need revealed to us by them. And that will prepare us for anything coming our way, we must be 'pre'pared...





Yes, it is not a surprised to me, this may appear condescending to you, but: I have been where you are and still am too in many, many ways but it is a process which is commonly called:
"the renewing of our minds" It is a process, it does not come with a *poof* affect or any instant dramatic revelations but, over a period of time in diligently seeking only Him in His words and not seeking what we desire to find or understand in His words.






PS:
If I have or am beginning to come across in my communication to you as indifferent or frustrated I apologize now, but I have a suggestion for you to be better served by His friends and our fellow servants:
When or if you wish to discuss this subject of "selective or subjective truth" in the future.
If you desire responses that will be profitable for both parties and the readers then I suggest you use the words:
"selective or subjective understanding" (Not subjective truth, but subjective understanding of the truth)
You will be received in a more generous and humble way by those who do have understanding and are willing to share it.

Promoting or postulating the idea that there is no objective truth in His words will only alienate you further from the beauty of the understanding of said objective truth.



Father bless, and have mercy on all of us.

I am just going to quote and reply to the rest of your paragraphs at once because for some reason when I try to move my cursor around for multiple quotes the screen keeps scrolling back to the top.

No, I don't get the idea that you are becoming indifferent or frustrated at all.

So these truths that are revealed to you when you dilligently seek, do you not suppose they are truths that are true for YOU at whatever part of the journey you may be on, for the purposes of learning whatever lessons are appropriate at that time for spiritual growth, while they could change at some other point in your journey? Is that something you have ever considered?

Looking at it this way, then subjective understanding and subjective truth are really one in the same, are they not?

We Are
Jul 6th 2011, 11:44 PM
You would? I don't think so. Fatal skepticism is a modern concept. Those men who split off of the Catholic Church at the time of the Reformation all shared a common idea: the truth was knowable.

Well, that doesn't necessarily mean that any of them knew the truth, correct? Of course, no one is going to say "These are my beliefs and they are wrong," but again, believing one is right does not make one right, does it? Or DOES it?


Only at first and only at the initial reading. But motivated, dedicated Bible students will not stop until he or she has come to understand what the Bible actually intends to say. Such Bible students are aware of your concern and are learning the skills necessary to avoid that mistake. Such dedicated Bible students discipline themselves against seeing what they want to see.

So let me ask you a very important question - Was it Charles Spurgeon or John Wesley that was not the "dedicated bible student?" I ask this because each of those two men went to their graves with very conflicting beliefs concerning the most important topic of all - the salvation of the human soul. I could say the same about Charles Stanely and John Macarthur, and so on. If these men spend their lives studying and seeking out the truths of scripture, praying, living obediently, etc; and have very conflicting views concerning salvation, what is the problem? .


Of course, I do not accept either of those alternatives. Your pessimistic view of hermeneutics might change once you have learned the skills of exegesis and were able to successfully arrive at the objective meaning of the text yourself. I recommend reading "The Language of God: a common sense approach to understanding and applying the Bible" by Ron Julian, J A Crabtree and David Crabtree http://www.amazon.com/Language-God-Ron-Julian/dp/1576832767 if it is still available in print. This book takes the reader through the process of interpreting various passages, demonstrating the principles of sound exegesis. .

Well before reading that, I would ask what is it about this particular writing on proper scriptural exegesis that causes it to stand out or be any more valid that any number of other writings on proper scriptural exegesis that would disagree with it?


Yes, we should be honest with ourselves and the world. It is a little dishonest, in my opinion, to say we don't know the truth when we think we do. Humility demands that I admit that I could be wrong, but honesty demands that I also admit that I wouldn't tell you what I think unless I thought it was true.

We justify it the same way we justify feeding the poor, or helping the needy. For me, sharing the truth with others is an act of love. Do I have the "right" to love another person? I would say that no only do I have a right, I have an obligation to love others as God and Jesus loved me. And just as God, in his mercy and love, shared the truth with me, I share the truth with others who want to hear it.

Very interesting answer! Two questions:

How do you suppose believers will be judged based upon the motives of their hearts, even if they don't have the truth?

How do you suppose non-believers will be judged based upon the motives of their hearts, even if THEY don't have the truth?

BroRog
Jul 7th 2011, 03:00 AM
Well, that doesn't necessarily mean that any of them knew the truth, correct?Theoretically. But in reality everyone was very close to each other. The division of the denominations was typically over a disagreement on one or two points.


Of course, no one is going to say "These are my beliefs and they are wrong," but again, believing one is right does not make one right, does it? Or DOES it?
Of course, but we are getting off track. The title of this thread supposes that division is due to some feature of the Bible itself, and assumes that men of good will, if they had Holy Scriptures of a different kind, would have produced a singular dogma. So far, your contention that the way the Bible was written accounts for the existence of desperate denominations has not been proven.


So let me ask you a very important question - Was it Charles Spurgeon or John Wesley that was not the "dedicated bible student?" I ask this because each of those two men went to their graves with very conflicting beliefs concerning the most important topic of all - the salvation of the human soul. I could say the same about Charles Stanely and John Macarthur, and so on. If these men spend their lives studying and seeking out the truths of scripture, praying, living obediently, etc; and have very conflicting views concerning salvation, what is the problem?Your question stipulates that these men are dedicated Bible students and seeking out the truths of scripture obediently. I have no idea whether this is true or not. I have no idea, for instance, if Charles Stanley studies the Bible to learn what is true, or if he simply uses the Bible to defend his dogma.

My own Bible teacher shares his experience as a beginning Bible teacher/student. He tells the story of a time when he worked through an interpretation on his own and finally figured out what the text was actually saying. After coming to his conclusion, he had coffee with a Baptist minister, and having explained his interpretation to the Baptist minister, the Baptist minister said something like, "I agree with your interpretation. That is, indeed, what the Bible is saying. But if I believed that, I wouldn't be a Baptist." My Bible teacher was shocked and his jaw dropped to the floor. Was this man actually suggesting that it was more important to be a Baptist than it was to understand what the Apostles were actually saying? It would appear so.

Another man who teaches the Bible, and whom I respect, relates the story of his experience when getting his master's degree. His teacher's approach to Bible study was something like this: read the text to see that it agrees with our denomination's systematic theology. If you come to a different conclusion then find a way to make the text agree with our doctrine. I have no idea whether the men you listed have/had intellectual integrity and remained humble before the text or whether these men were like the Baptist minister who would rather be a Baptist than change his mind about a particular text.

In my experience, Bible study takes a lot of work and remains a lifetime process. When I started a dedicated course of study, I came to the text with ideas, doctrines, concepts, presuppositions etc. given to me by pastors, teachers, preachers, and other fellow Christians. Over time I learned that some of what I was taught was in error, and some what I was taught needed modification. Coming to learn the objective meaning of the Bible -- passage by passage -- takes time, lots of time and I find that I have changed my mind a few times about certain passages. I think you will find this to be the case with any Bible student/teacher with integrity and humility. We all begin under a particular systematic theology, but those with intellectual integrity and humility before the text find themselves departing from the official dogma.

I imagine that Charles Spurgeon, John Wesley and the others had the same experience. I know, for instance, that John Wesley changed his position on a few things over the course of his lifetime. My own Bible teacher says the same thing about himself. He has said on more than one occasion that if he were able to go back in time to tell himself what he has learned, he wouldn't believe himself. The point is, when we compare a Spurgeon to a Wesley we are comparing apples to oranges because each man is constantly learning, constantly adjusting their thinking based on new understandings. I imagine that if Spurgeon and Wesley were to meet in later life, and if they were humble before the text, they would find that they weren't that far from each other.


Well before reading that, I would ask what is it about this particular writing on proper scriptural exegesis that causes it to stand out or be any more valid that any number of other writings on proper scriptural exegesis that would disagree with it?Try asking a question without a built-in bias. Why would you assume that the book I recommended is different than the others? And how would anyone answer the question without a specific counterexample in which to make a comparison? My recommendation is based on personal experience as I own a copy myself and have read it. In my experience, this is the only valid reason to recommend a book. I could be wrong, but I am hearing a question behind the question -- something like, "why should I read ANY book on proper exegesis since I already affirm that the objective meaning of the passage is out of reach?" All I can say to that question is to return to the original premise of this thread. You have yet to prove that the Bible is different in kind, function, features, conditions, etc. from any other form of writing. Your initial question assumes that the Bible is a different thing, and written in a manner which is incomprehensible or enigmatic to such a great degree that finding the objective meaning is near impossible.



Very interesting answer! Two questions:

How do you suppose believers will be judged based upon the motives of their hearts, even if they don't have the truth?Insightful question. If I understand the overall picture the Bible paints concerning the final judgment, God is not going to judge us based on whether we got our doctrine right, or how much of the picture we understand. God will judge us based on the condition of our hearts.

However, having said that, I need to also point out that clear teaching of the NT is that God will bring his wrath on those who have rejected his son Jesus Christ. That is, assuming that a person has come in contact with the truth about the true identity of the Messiah, and having rejected him as the savior, there is no other person by which men can be saved. A person doesn't need to know that Jesus is the messiah. Abraham, for instance, didn't know that Jesus is the Messiah. But we deduce that had he been made aware of the fact, Abraham would have welcomed the idea just as all true believers do. So, if anything, we are not condemned based on what we know, but on what we reject.


How do you suppose non-believers will be judged based upon the motives of their hearts, even if THEY don't have the truth?Same answer. If these "non-believers" are rejecting Jesus, then this rejection demonstrates a heart not willing to accept the truth. But if these "non-believers" are rejecting Christian dogma that happens to be wrong, then they aren't rejecting Jesus, they are rejecting error, which is what God would want them to do.

We Are
Jul 7th 2011, 03:08 PM
How is that possible with the subjectivity that you propose is the absolute?

Well, I think a good start would be if we were all to humble ourselves and confess our complete blindness, our foolish appearance to the world, and our total and utter miserable failure to do our part in fulfilling Yahshua's prayer that we all be as one so that the world may believe, coupled with an agreement to lay down our ego's and stop trying to do it ourselves, and to sit and listen as Mary did as opposed to running around in vain as Martha did.

Who will be held most accountable for the unbelieving world - the unbelievers themselves, or the body of Christ who has failed to unite as one in which case the world would have believed?


Secondly, you are misunderstanding me. I don't find "unity" outrageous, in fact, I long for the day it is expressed on the earth in answer the prayer of Jesus at the end of John 17. The day of the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God - the day of the maturity of the church worldwide - will be a day of explosive and historically effective evangelism. What I find "outrageous" is your statement calling for the church to draw back from evangelism until that day. That was more than outrageous, it was unbiblical sentimentalism masking itself in spiritual language.

There is an interesting lesson that can be learned from two gospel stories:

Luke 10
39 She had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord’s feet listening to what he said. 40 But Martha was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made. She came to him and asked, “Lord, don’t you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!”
41 “Martha, Martha,” the Lord answered, “you are worried and upset about many things, 42 but few things are needed—or indeed only one. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken away from her.”

Also in John 11:

20 When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went out to meet him, but Mary stayed at home.

...

28 After she had said this, she went back and called her sister Mary aside. “The Teacher is here,” she said, “and is asking for you.” 29 When Mary heard this, she got up quickly and went to him.

Very interesting that in both stories, Mary sat and waited, while Martha was a busy body. And in the second story, Mary waited until she was called to go to the Teacher.

Now with 20,000 or more denominations going about, trying to convert the world, all seeing and preaching different things, it could make one wonder who, if anyone, is really sitting at the feet of the teacher listening to what He says, and who is running around in vain doing their own thing.

Of course if any lesson that could be learned from these stories does not fit within "proper biblical hermeneutics," then perhaps it will be missed, or dismissed.

We Are
Jul 7th 2011, 03:14 PM
I'd take caution related to how you speak of another Man's wife. She may be messy to you, but She's beautiful to Him.

And no, your question was neither my premise nor my point.

You seem to be of the belief that the body and the bride are one in the same, but I do not see it that way. Although we are merely dealing with semantics here when discussing the body and the bride, I see the body as Martha, the tares, those who will say "Lord, Lord," while the bride is Mary, the wheat, those who have produced a crop and will reign in the Kingdom with Emmanuel.

We Are
Jul 7th 2011, 03:48 PM
at first i thought this was a easy question. then i realiized the pharisees had scripture. they read it they taught it they proclaimed to everyone how it was supposed to be. then Christ came and they even tried to tell him they knew what was right.


so they saw something in scripture vastly different than what Christ did.

remember Christ said it would get even worse, what are we 2000+ years down the line. just like the pharisees did back then the preachers/teachers do even worse today.

people still want to put their faith in man rather than God, lots of false teachers, blind leading the blind.

so to answer can people see whatever they wish within ? I do believe so, the children of the devil thought they saw in scripture a reason to want Christ dead. So if someone can see that in scripture I suppose almost anything else can be seen.

this is how you find 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.


Great points made!

From the gospels, all indications point to the fact that Old Testament scriptures were written in such a way that NO ONE understood them:

John 5
39 You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

Luke 18
31 Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. 32 He will be delivered over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him and spit on him; 33 they will flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.” 34 The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about.

It is only when He opens our mind to the scriptures that we begin to understand them.

Luke 24
25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

And again later:

45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.

This certainly begs the question that has been asked again and again: With so many Christians seeing so many different things in the scriptures, Has He opened anyone's mind to the understanding of the scriptures?

Taking all this into account, and knowing that Christ only taught in parables in order to mask the truth, it certainly appears as if God has not authored the bible, and does not deal with mankind, in any plain and open way that anyone can understand.

We Are
Jul 7th 2011, 06:11 PM
Theoretically. But in reality everyone was very close to each other. The division of the denominations was typically over a disagreement on one or two points.

Even still, what of those one or two points? I assume most might say they were "minor" points, but saying that gets us right back to where we started. Who determines what is a "minor" point and what is a major point? Again, it boils down to every man doing what he sees right in his own eyes, does it not? This is why I said before - with no true Light (capital L) on this earth, we are basically living in a "reality" in which subjective truth masquerades itself as objective truth. This is not some off the wall idea I'm just throwing out. This conclusion has been reached after years of intense studying and seeking and contemplation.

I refer again to John 9:

4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”


Of course, but we are getting off track. The title of this thread supposes that division is due to some feature of the Bible itself, and assumes that men of good will, if they had Holy Scriptures of a different kind, would have produced a singular dogma. So far, your contention that the way the Bible was written accounts for the existence of desperate denominations has not been proven.

I believe with deeper contemplation this turns out not to be the case. Saying that man is naturally inclined to read whatever he wants into the scriptures is one and the same with saying the bible is written in that way. This isn't about "blaming" the bible or "blaming" man for that matter. This is simply realizing the way things are.

If we have an all knowing God who created man and knows him inside and out, and knows the end from the beginning and knows all thoughts of all men, and this same God wrote the bible FOR that same mankind, knowing that man would read into it whatever he wishes, can we not say that the bible is written in such a way that anyone can read into it whatever they wish? And in reality, this goes beyond the bible. This is life as a whole - politics, science, you name it. This is the "reality" in which we live. While the bridegroom is away, mankind is fasting from the ability to see Truth.

I see incredible parallels between the passage above in John, and this one from the gospel of Matthew:

Matthew 9
15 Jesus answered, “How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast.


Your question stipulates that these men are dedicated Bible students and seeking out the truths of scripture obediently. I have no idea whether this is true or not. I have no idea, for instance, if Charles Stanley studies the Bible to learn what is true, or if he simply uses the Bible to defend his dogma.

My own Bible teacher shares his experience as a beginning Bible teacher/student. He tells the story of a time when he worked through an interpretation on his own and finally figured out what the text was actually saying. After coming to his conclusion, he had coffee with a Baptist minister, and having explained his interpretation to the Baptist minister, the Baptist minister said something like, "I agree with your interpretation. That is, indeed, what the Bible is saying. But if I believed that, I wouldn't be a Baptist." My Bible teacher was shocked and his jaw dropped to the floor. Was this man actually suggesting that it was more important to be a Baptist than it was to understand what the Apostles were actually saying? It would appear so.

Great story! Now, with this in mind, we have here something that is a bit different than what I'm saying about men seeing whatever they wish. In that case, we have someone who is being convicted of seeing a certain "truth," and yet remains stubborn to it, at which point he would be choking off his own potential for spiritual growth as described in the parable of the sower.


Another man who teaches the Bible, and whom I respect, relates the story of his experience when getting his master's degree. His teacher's approach to Bible study was something like this: read the text to see that it agrees with our denomination's systematic theology. If you come to a different conclusion then find a way to make the text agree with our doctrine. I have no idea whether the men you listed have/had intellectual integrity and remained humble before the text or whether these men were like the Baptist minister who would rather be a Baptist than change his mind about a particular text.

In my experience, Bible study takes a lot of work and remains a lifetime process. When I started a dedicated course of study, I came to the text with ideas, doctrines, concepts, presuppositions etc. given to me by pastors, teachers, preachers, and other fellow Christians. Over time I learned that some of what I was taught was in error, and some what I was taught needed modification. Coming to learn the objective meaning of the Bible -- passage by passage -- takes time, lots of time and I find that I have changed my mind a few times about certain passages.

Here is a key place in which to stop. Judging by the very fact that you have believed certain things about certain passages only to change your mind on their meanings later, does this not leave open the idea that you could possibly change your mind about what you believe yet again (and again and again), even on some of those certain passages? Again, if you believed you were "right" about a passage only to change your mind about it later, how does that "rightness" differ from the "rightness" that you feel about that particular passage now?

So let me propose an idea to you that you may have never contemplated. The bible being written in such a way that men can see anything, multiple truths, within it, is actually all a part of the spiritual growth process. We are brought to certain beliefs during certain parts of our journey, understanding certain "truths" as a necessary part of the journey at whichever place we are at on that journey. But then as we grow and learn more, we move to a different aspect of the "truth" about a particular passage, and then possibly even again and again. Almost as if we are "chasing truth."

So at different points along the way on our journey, we find that what was "true" for us at some point in the past, no longer applies, and instead we gain a higher level of understanding, and the truth "changes."

In 1 Corinthians chapter 10, Paul compared Israels wanderings in the wilderness to our own lives and spiritual growth process. What is interesting about that whole scenario is that putting the blood on the doorpost at Passover (coming to a belief in Christ) was only the first step before venturing out into the wilderness. Of course, the wilderness had to be experienced before entering the promised land (the Kingdom).

And so, what if this is not only true on an inward, individual level, but also on a grand level? Christ, the Passover Lamb, was crucified and resurrected, bringing men out of bondage. However, when He went away back to heaven, night time came. This is the wilderness. For the last 2,000 years, the church has been venturing through the wilderness as a necessary part of the journey before the coming of the Kingdom, when the true Light comes to earth, so that man can finally see objective Truth. Until then, we simply eat our daily manna and discard it when it no longer suits us, only to keep eating more manna as we treck through the wilderness.

As I said, the amazing thing is that we can see this apply not only on a grand level to the whole church before the coming of Christ, but also on our individual journeys as we "wander through the wilderness" of the narrow path, seeking the kingdom:

The double application of this being:

1)The passover lamb was sacrificed and resurrected, freeing the captives, only to leave the world shortly thereafter, at which time the church entered a period of wilderness until the time that the Light returns in which men can finally see the Truth (entering the promised land).

2) We individually come believe in Christ, the message of the cross, the passover lamb, being made "free indeed" by the Son, only to enter our own personal wilderness until the time that we finally enter the Kingdom of true Light and Truth.


I think you will find this to be the case with any Bible student/teacher with integrity and humility. We all begin under a particular systematic theology, but those with intellectual integrity and humility before the text find themselves departing from the official dogma.

I imagine that Charles Spurgeon, John Wesley and the others had the same experience. I know, for instance, that John Wesley changed his position on a few things over the course of his lifetime. My own Bible teacher says the same thing about himself. He has said on more than one occasion that if he were able to go back in time to tell himself what he has learned, he wouldn't believe himself. The point is, when we compare a Spurgeon to a Wesley we are comparing apples to oranges because each man is constantly learning, constantly adjusting their thinking based on new understandings. I imagine that if Spurgeon and Wesley were to meet in later life, and if they were humble before the text, they would find that they weren't that far from each other.

Again I say - perhaps the reason Spurgeon, Wesley, and everyone all seem to come to different conclusions is because nobody has realized that we are merely wandering in the wilderness while the Light of the world is gone, and that truth at this time is not a destination, but a journey. Truth is merely daily manna that must constantly be renewed in order to continue the journey. And while everyone is on their own individual journey, all will be seeing different truths at different times.


Try asking a question without a built-in bias. Why would you assume that the book I recommended is different than the others? And how would anyone answer the question without a specific counterexample in which to make a comparison? My recommendation is based on personal experience as I own a copy myself and have read it. In my experience, this is the only valid reason to recommend a book. I could be wrong, but I am hearing a question behind the question -- something like, "why should I read ANY book on proper exegesis since I already affirm that the objective meaning of the passage is out of reach?" All I can say to that question is to return to the original premise of this thread. You have yet to prove that the Bible is different in kind, function, features, conditions, etc. from any other form of writing. Your initial question assumes that the Bible is a different thing, and written in a manner which is incomprehensible or enigmatic to such a great degree that finding the objective meaning is near impossible.

But again, as I have been presenting in this post, if we are truly in the "wilderness" or the "night," then finding the objective truth as a finality IS impossible. In this way, it is nearly impossible to judge our brother, as it negates any need for debate, if all were to come to the understanding that each soul is at its own point on the journey. In this way the church could finally come together as requested in Yahshua's prayer before His suffering. The irony of it all is - the "truth" that the church could finally agree upon would be that there is no one set truth.

This may sound foolish, but remember:


1 Corinthians 3
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.

And again:

Judges 21
25 In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit.

Why did every man do as he saw fit? Because there was no king. Why does every man do as he sees fit now? Because the light of the world, the bridegroom, the King, has gone away.


Insightful question. If I understand the overall picture the Bible paints concerning the final judgment, God is not going to judge us based on whether we got our doctrine right, or how much of the picture we understand. God will judge us based on the condition of our hearts.

However, having said that, I need to also point out that clear teaching of the NT is that God will bring his wrath on those who have rejected his son Jesus Christ. That is, assuming that a person has come in contact with the truth about the true identity of the Messiah, and having rejected him as the savior, there is no other person by which men can be saved. A person doesn't need to know that Jesus is the messiah. Abraham, for instance, didn't know that Jesus is the Messiah. But we deduce that had he been made aware of the fact, Abraham would have welcomed the idea just as all true believers do. So, if anything, we are not condemned based on what we know, but on what we reject.

Same answer. If these "non-believers" are rejecting Jesus, then this rejection demonstrates a heart not willing to accept the truth. But if these "non-believers" are rejecting Christian dogma that happens to be wrong, then they aren't rejecting Jesus, they are rejecting error, which is what God would want them to do.

Now this is where things get very interesting. You say "God is not going to judge us based on whether we got our doctrine right," but is the message of the cross not the ultimate doctrine? So, does this mean God will only judge non-believers based upon doctrine, while believers are free to have erroneous doctrine aside from having the correct doctrine about the cross?

BroRog
Jul 7th 2011, 08:06 PM
Even still, what of those one or two points? I assume most might say they were "minor" points, but saying that gets us right back to where we started.Are you sure? Maybe you prefer to stay where you started?


Again, it boils down to every man doing what he sees right in his own eyes, does it not?This goes without saying; but it isn't relevant to the question at hand.


This is why I said before - with no true Light (capital L) on this earth, we are basically living in a "reality" in which subjective truth masquerades itself as objective truth.You haven't made your case yet.


This is not some off the wall idea I'm just throwing out. This conclusion has been reached after years of intense studying and seeking and contemplation.Your statement right here purports to be a truth statement, which I assume you would claim to be an objective truth; and as such it is self-defeating. In other words, you want me to accept your statement as an objective truth, i.e. you have reached a conclusion, and if I were to accept that what you are telling me is objectively true, then I can not accept your conclusion that subjectivity masquerades as objectivity. For if I were to agree that subjectivity masquerades as objectivity, I could not agree that you have reached a conclusion.


I refer again to John 9:

4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” Cleaver but inconclusive on the one hand and illogical on the other. While it is true that the Light of the world remains while Jesus is in the world, we can not say that Jesus is no longer in the world with respect to the question of the Light. Jesus also said that where two or three are gathered, I am with you. He also said that he would leave the Holy Spirit -- the spirit of truth -- to function as the light to the world in his absence. I can conceive of a time when neither the men of faith gather or the Holy Spirit is removed from the world, which is why I say it is inconclusive whether or not truth remains in the world. The light is fading fast.

But with regard to the question at hand, "whether the Bible is enigmatic, which accounts for the many disparate interpretations" your citation of John 9, defeats your argument, since the Bible is NOT so enigmatic that you feel free to cite it in support of your view. Your argument relies on the fact that the Bible is NOT enigmatic, which contradicts your supposition: the Bible is enigmatic; the Bible is NOT enigmatic.


I believe with deeper contemplation this turns out not to be the case. Saying that man is naturally inclined to read whatever he wants into the scriptures is one and the same with saying the bible is written in that way. This isn't about "blaming" the bible or "blaming" man for that matter. This is simply realizing the way things are.
See my comment above. You haven't proven your case yet, and so far, the proof you have offered is self-defeating.



I see incredible parallels between the passage above in John, and this one from the gospel of Matthew:

Matthew 9
15 Jesus answered, “How can the guests of the bridegroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast.

As long as you continue to quote the scriptures, you continue to defeat your own argument.


Great story! Now, with this in mind, we have here something that is a bit different than what I'm saying about men seeing whatever they wish. In that case, we have someone who is being convicted of seeing a certain "truth," and yet remains stubborn to it, at which point he would be choking off his own potential for spiritual growth as described in the parable of the sower.Right, and since I have presented a different but valid and plausible explanation for the disparate voices we hear out there in the world, then you have no recourse but to prove that, in fact, the Bible is enigmatic, which accounts for the many disparate interpretations, not the fact that men stubbornly refuse to see the truth. In a sense, now, you need to prove TWO things: 1) that the Bible is enigmatic, and 2) this accounts for the many disparate interpretations. So far, since you cite the Bible as proof, you demonstrate that you do not affirm the idea that the Bible is enigmatic.


Here is a key place in which to stop. Judging by the very fact that you have believed certain things about certain passages only to change your mind on their meanings later, does this not leave open the idea that you could possibly change your mind about what you believe yet again (and again and again), even on some of those certain passages? Again, if you believed you were "right" about a passage only to change your mind about it later, how does that "rightness" differ from the "rightness" that you feel about that particular passage now?My experience of being right doesn't change as I'm sure you know also. The process is rational, and justified, given that the process of exegesis, properly performed, moves the student in a spiral course around the target of the objective meaning until the objective meaning is reached. The process takes a spiral course for a couple of reasons, among which is our naturally high tolerance for textual dissonance.

The process of writing/reading is inherently linear as the writer attempts to put his ideas into my head. But as word follows word and sentence follows sentence the writer expects the reader to hold several concepts in suspension until the entire point is made at which point all the concepts collapse down to a singularity of meaning. If the ideas in the head of the writer have made it into my head, the text will seem to flow downstream, smoothly and unimpeded. But if I have misunderstood the writer, the river will seem to have eddy currents, back water, or even rapids, depending on the my mistake. With respect to Biblical interpretation, I will experience this as textual dissonance, perhaps filled with non sequitur and inexplicable transitions from idea to idea. The spiral process involves finding the interpretation that resolves all of the non sequitur and inexplicable transitions and ideas that seem to conflict, and apparent contradictions and all other things that make one piece of text seem dissonant with the rest of the passage.

If I am right, all of us have a tolerance for textual dissonance. When we read the Bible we get the gist of what is being said, but certain terms or phrases or even whole sentences seem out of place or we don't understand them. As such, to the extent that we remain comfortable with these seemingly dissonant terms, phrases and etc. to that extent we are comfortable with not reaching the objective meaning of the text. Those times when I was sure that I was right about the meaning of a text, but changed my mind later, often times resulted when I finally came to understand how the seemingly dissonant bits helped the author make his point. I don't think I every totally changed my mind about the meaning of a text. Rather, my change of view was always a refinement on what I understood. As I say, we can usually get the gist of what is being said, and the process of interpretation involves a reiterative process of refinement as we seek to understand the bits of the text that seem dissonant. The target is reachable; I just need to remain uncomfortable with dissonance.

In a related matter, it has been my experience that much of the disagreements over doctrine is centered on single, individual verses, taken out of context. If writing/reading is a process in which the writer builds a concept from words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs and that the concept isn't communicated until the entire thing coalesces from the entire offering, taking a sentence out of that context adds ambiguity to the sentence. In other words, each unit of language, whether it be a word a phrase or a sentence inherently contains various amounts of ambiguity such that the writer must combine many such words and phrases and sentences to remove all ambiguity as to the intended meaning. The ONLY way to make the Bible say what we want it to say is to introduce ambiguity back into the text and the easiest, most efficient means to add ambiguity is to focus on individual verses taken out of context.

Whereas you want to argue that disparate views are the result of how the Bible is constructed or written, I would argue that disparate views are partly the result of how the Bible is used, that is, not like a normal book. We would never allow some to quote single sentences out of normal literature, infusing the sentence with meaning that the author didn't intend, but for some reason Christians feel free to misuse and mishandle the Bible and dishonor those holy men who contributed to the holy scriptures. If anything, we should hold each other to the same, if not higher standards when using the Bible authoritatively as we do other works of literature.


So let me propose an idea to you that you may have never contemplated. The bible being written in such a way that men can see anything, multiple truths, within it, is actually all a part of the spiritual growth process. We are brought to certain beliefs during certain parts of our journey, understanding certain "truths" as a necessary part of the journey at whichever place we are at on that journey. But then as we grow and learn more, we move to a different aspect of the "truth" about a particular passage, and then possibly even again and again. Almost as if we are "chasing truth." I would agree with that, but not based on the systemic structure of the Bible. What changes is not the Bible; but we change. The Bible is clear enough but we are blind. And as we grow in wisdom we begin to see better. OUR eyesight improves.


So at different points along the way on our journey, we find that what was "true" for us at some point in the past, no longer applies, and instead we gain a higher level of understanding, and the truth "changes." I understand what you mean but I wouldn't put it that way because the truth is fixed. It never changes. The journey is a walk in which the struggle to find the truth is a healing process in which the more truth we are willing to accept, the more truth we are given to see.


In 1 Corinthians chapter 10, Paul compared Israels wanderings in the wilderness to our own lives and spiritual growth process. What is interesting about that whole scenario is that putting the blood on the doorpost at Passover (coming to a belief in Christ) was only the first step before venturing out into the wilderness. Of course, the wilderness had to be experienced before entering the promised land (the Kingdom).

And so, what if this is not only true on an inward, individual level, but also on a grand level? Christ, the Passover Lamb, was crucified and resurrected, bringing men out of bondage. However, when He went away back to heaven, night time came. This is the wilderness. For the last 2,000 years, the church has been venturing through the wilderness as a necessary part of the journey before the coming of the Kingdom, when the true Light comes to earth, so that man can finally see objective Truth. Until then, we simply eat our daily manna and discard it when it no longer suits us, only to keep eating more manna as we treck through the wilderness. Again, I understand your point, but I don't know how to actually know what the "church" experienced. But I can know my own subjectivity and how it has changed over time.


As I said, the amazing thing is that we can see this apply not only on a grand level to the whole church before the coming of Christ, but also on our individual journeys as we "wander through the wilderness" of the narrow path, seeking the kingdom:

The double application of this being:

1)The passover lamb was sacrificed and resurrected, freeing the captives, only to leave the world shortly thereafter, at which time the church entered a period of wilderness until the time that the Light returns in which men can finally see the Truth (entering the promised land).

2) We individually come believe in Christ, the message of the cross, the passover lamb, being made "free indeed" by the Son, only to enter our own personal wilderness until the time that we finally enter the Kingdom of true Light and Truth.I don't believe this to be the case, since Jesus promised that he would leave us with the Spirit of Truth and that he would superintend the works of the Apostles to bring us the truth. I suspect that you may be unfairly reading history through modern lenses. I believe that the world today is slipping quickly into darkness, not even believing that such a thing as truth exists, let alone searching for what the truth might be. And if I am so bold as to extrapolate my experiences on the Internet to the church at large, I would agree with you, if your point were to suggest that in the last 20 years or so the church seems to be wandering in a wilderness of ambiguity, doubt, and a lack of direction.


But again, as I have been presenting in this post, if we are truly in the "wilderness" or the "night," then finding the objective truth as a finality IS impossible.It's not impossible. It just takes more work than we expect and some of us are not willing to take the time.


In this way, it is nearly impossible to judge our brother, as it negates any need for debate, if all were to come to the understanding that each soul is at its own point on the journey. In this way the church could finally come together as requested in Yahshua's prayer before His suffering. The irony of it all is - the "truth" that the church could finally agree upon would be that there is no one set truth.If we do, we have lost and the Devil has won; and the world would indeed be set for judgment.


Now this is where things get very interesting. You say "God is not going to judge us based on whether we got our doctrine right," but is the message of the cross not the ultimate doctrine? So, does this mean God will only judge non-believers based upon doctrine, while believers are free to have erroneous doctrine aside from having the correct doctrine about the cross?When I say that God is not going to judge us based on whether we get our doctrine right, keep in mind the alternative that I am suggesting, i.e. that God is going to judge the state of our hearts. I am reminded of my mathematics teachers who, when giving us a math test, asked us to show our work. It was not enough that we got the right answer, but we needed to demonstrate that we weren't simply making good guesses, or cheating off our neighbor. Likewise, someone might get lucky and be born into a Christian family and attend church during childhood, and for this reason such a person will know all the right answers and all the right things to say in order to sound "Christian." But Christianity would be an arbitrary and silly religion if we actually believed that salvation was based on having all the right answers to particular theological questions. I mean, why these particular questions? Why not base salvation on knowing the capital cities of all the states? or all the elements on the periodic table of the elements? or all the bones of the body? or all the verses to the Star Spangled Banner? What kind of God grants salvation to those who have memorized a bunch of facts? How weird is that?

The Gospel isn't just a bunch of facts: Jesus is lord, born of a virgin, turned water into wine, died on a cross, resurrected after three days and etc. The gospel presents us with ideas that challenge us to do something, question our existence, and motivates us to orient ourselves to it and assess how we are situated with respect to who Jesus is and does this effect my own perspective and how I will live? How do we define ourselves? What motivates us? What drives us? What controls us? These are the kinds of things by which God will judge us, not on what grade we get on a true/false test.

episkopos
Jul 7th 2011, 08:40 PM
People can take certain portions of the bible out of the context of the whole message and do practically anything with it.

When the bible is understood properly, then something happens in the spiritual realm...which in turn affects the natural realm.

How do you know you have the correct formula and understanding to make an atomic bomb?

Well if you get it...there is a tremendous release of power that destroys everything for miles around.

How do you know you have correctly understood the bible? Same thing...a release of power....but this time rather than destroying it brings life!

the rookie
Jul 7th 2011, 09:47 PM
Well, I think a good start

That's part of the problem, my friend. You can't preach subjectivity, say "truth is in the eye of the beholder", tell folks on another thread that "the point of life is different for everyone" and what they want it to be, and make demands of anyone. You're telling me what you think. You told me earlier that truth is different for everyone. So basically, no one anywhere has to do a single thing related to what you say next because it's what you think - and it's not objective truth from a source outside of yourself.


would be if we were all to humble ourselves and confess our complete blindness, our foolish appearance to the world, and our total and utter miserable failure to do our part in fulfilling Yahshua's prayer

Where does Jesus say anything about "our part in fulfilling His prayer"? He prayed to the Father that He would answer it. "Our part", according to Paul in Ephesians 4, is that the five-fold ministry (given as a gift from the Father at the ascension of Jesus) would work with the Holy Spirit to produce something related to mature faith - but it's God's initiative. Jesus wasn't praying to us, He was praying to the Father about us, which means that we have no part in answering His prayer. That truth is part of our hope.


that we all be as one so that the world may believe, coupled with an agreement to lay down our ego's and stop trying to do it ourselves, and to sit and listen as Mary did as opposed to running around in vain as Martha did.

"Stop trying to do it by ourselves" by "doing our part to answer the prayer of Jesus"?


Who will be held most accountable for the unbelieving world - the unbelievers themselves, or the body of Christ who has failed to unite as one in which case the world would have believed?

Jesus would be held accountable, as it is His plan and He is the only One worthy (capable) to execute it.

If we don't respond to Jesus, then we are held accountable (1 Pet. 4:17).

Then, if the world doesn't respond to Jesus, they are held accountable (Acts 17).


Very interesting that in both stories, Mary sat and waited, while Martha was a busy body. And in the second story, Mary waited until she was called to go to the Teacher.

The issue with Martha isn't that she was "serving". Jesus calls Himself "the Servant of all" and considers serving us one of His main callings. The issue with Martha was that she was serving with a wrong spirit (she was "worried and troubled about many things").


Now with 20,000 or more denominations going about, trying to convert the world, all seeing and preaching different things, it could make one wonder who, if anyone, is really sitting at the feet of the teacher listening to what He says, and who is running around in vain doing their own thing.

I think that you raise a good point, but is the issue "learning from the Teacher" or failing to put the first commandment in first place? Our identity and our works are to flow from love from Jesus and love for Jesus. The outworking of that love - implementing teaching - is secondary to being loved by Jesus and loving Him back, which is central to our identity and our life in Him.


Of course if any lesson that could be learned from these stories does not fit within "proper biblical hermeneutics," then perhaps it will be missed, or dismissed.

"Proper biblical hermeneutics" could also equal "trying to understand what the Bible actually says versus what I want it to say". Prayer, fasting, and "proper biblical hermeneutics" is simply a recognition of my own weakness - and my many wrong lenses - that hinders me from understanding the Bible. Humility seeks to remove those obstacles to understanding.

the rookie
Jul 7th 2011, 09:48 PM
You seem to be of the belief that the body and the bride are one in the same, but I do not see it that way. Although we are merely dealing with semantics here when discussing the body and the bride, I see the body as Martha, the tares, those who will say "Lord, Lord," while the bride is Mary, the wheat, those who have produced a crop and will reign in the Kingdom with Emmanuel.

You seem to be of the belief that you get to define "body" and "bride" however you want. You seem to believe that you can do the same with the parable of the wheat and the tares.

gringo300
Jul 8th 2011, 03:14 AM
All the time, I get the feeling like people are twisting my words to make it look like I'm promoting unBiblical doctrines.

In the same way, people can twist what the Bible says.

nzyr
Jul 8th 2011, 08:18 AM
On the surface, that may seem to be the case, but with deeper thought, just how "very clear" are these things?

For example, how clear is the command "Thou shalt not kill/murder" when the same Yahweh who gave that command also gave the command to kill/murder elsewhere in OT scripture?

It's clear to me. The people of God are not to be murderers. Yes God may have told the Israelites to kill people in a time of war. If God told them to do it then it was right. But it's not murder if God told them to do it. Israel was a theocracy. It was a government under God. At this point in time I don't believe there are any countries that are theocracies.

PilgrimPastor
Jul 9th 2011, 04:13 AM
Does anyone agree with that statement?

It seems as though this is the case with the ever fragmenting body of Christ which exponentially spawns denominations like the branches on a tree (Matthew 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19), and the endless, centuries-old debates over issues such OSAS/NOSAS, pre-trib/post-trib, etc; with all involved parties of course having plenty of scripture to back up their opposing views.

Perhaps the truth is that no one sees the truth. It could shed new light on what the Christ speaks in John chapter 9:

John 9
4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

What does everyone think about this? Is what we call the "bible" a sealed up book whose true meanings have not yet been revealed to man? Has it been "night time" for the last 2,000 years?

Core issues are crystal clear: salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to God's glory alone as revealed in Scripture alone. These matters are uncontestable to any who wish to allow the Scripture to speak for itself.

Pre / Post / Mid trib, ya, up for grabs. I have a strong opinion on many secondary matters BUT I am a bit of a "Pan-Millennialist" ... its all going to pan out in the end and I don't get a vote... :) As to its relationship to the Scripture you cite, I don't initially see a connection, but maybe if we debated it long enough I would. :idea: