The Bible--Let It Speak
Our apparent attitude toward the biblical authority of some, in CD, seems to be at a new low when it comes to usage and acceptance. Or, is it our misunderstanding of the Bible?
We should see and approach the Bible as the highest authority for human beings. The Scriptures are to be living oracles-- “A divine utterance delivered to man, usually in answer to a request for guidance.” In light of this, all CD users should be inclined to view the Bible as more valuable than human philosophy. Every part of the Bible is given by inspiration of God. Therefore, it can, and should, be trusted.
I am under no delusion that the Bible was written ―through the imperfect expression of human language. That is, the Word of God is given in the words of men in history. Yet, at the same time, the Bible is itself the inspired Word of God, the only infallible rule for faith and practice, and that the character of the Bible must determine the appropriateness of critical methodologies.
In regard to the methods used for interpreting the Bible, I agree with G. Ladd that the method of interpretation is “Biblical Realism.” That is, one should make every attempt to understand the Bible from within its authors’ own ideas rather than to force the biblical message into modern thought forms. When it all said and done, the Bible should be its “own expositor.” CM
See Thought Resources:
George Eldon Ladd, The New Testament and Criticism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1967), 12, 15.
George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom, xiii.
Comments
-
@C_M_ said:
the Bible as more valuable than human philosophy. **I agree with the above! Along with philosophy, I would also add that the Bible is more important than creeds, confessions, theologies, and dogmas.
-
@C_M_ said:
Our apparent attitude toward the biblical authority of some, in CD, seems to be at a new low when it comes to usage and acceptance. Or, is it our misunderstanding of the Bible?I don't really know how to comment concerning "attitude toward the biblical authority of some", seeing that I am not sure what you mean with "biblical authority of some".
Are you talking about "the biblical authority of some" or "the attitude of some toward the biblical authority [of other folks here on CD]" or "attitude of some toward the authority of the Bible" or perhaps something altogether different from these possibilities I mentioned here?@C_M_ said:
We should see and approach the Bible as the highest authority for human beings. The Scriptures are to be living oracles-- “A divine utterance delivered to man, usually in answer to a request for guidance.” In light of this, all CD users should be inclined to view the Bible as more valuable than human philosophy. Every part of the Bible is given by inspiration of God. Therefore, it can, and should, be trusted.Ok ... this seems to indicate that you were talking about "biblical authority" as "the authority of the Bible as the inspired Word of God".
I agree that the Scriptures, as originally given were inspired by God and as such I consider those to be "Word of God" and having highest authority for truth.
@C_M_ said:
I am under no delusion that the Bible was written ―through the imperfect expression of human language. That is, the Word of God is given in the words of men in history. Yet, at the same time, the Bible is itself the inspired Word of God, the only infallible rule for faith and practice, and that the character of the Bible must determine the appropriateness of critical methodologies.The problem I encounter quite often is that people think that their understanding and interpretation is equal to the truth of the Bible; in other words, they regard any differing understanding and interpretation as deviating from the Bible truth and thus in error, when in truth, it is deviating from their understanding and interpretation ... and perhaps is closer to the truth of the Bible than their understanding and interpretation.
@C_M_ said:
In regard to the methods used for interpreting the Bible, I agree with G. Ladd that the method of interpretation is “Biblical Realism.” That is, one should make every attempt to understand the Bible from within its authors’ own ideas rather than to force the biblical message into modern thought forms. When it all said and done, the Bible should be its “own expositor.”I too am of the opinion that a true understanding and interpretation of the Biblical Scriptures will not produce any contradictions between passages in Scriptures, but it will be reasonable and logical (for one, because I do not understand God to be an unreasonable or illogical God, and also because God gave man reason and logic as means to separate truth from error).
-
Many times the Prophets didn't understand their own prophecies.
“Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.” (1 Peter 1:9–12)
We must seek the meaning of the passage from a NT perspective. As Paul says "the letter (literal) kills but the Spirit gives life.
-
@C_M_ said:
Our apparent attitude toward the biblical authority of some, in CD, seems to be at a new low when it comes to usage and acceptance. Or, is it our misunderstanding of the Bible?We should see and approach the Bible as the highest authority for human beings. The Scriptures are to be living oracles-- “A divine utterance delivered to man, usually in answer to a request for guidance.” In light of this, all CD users should be inclined to view the Bible as more valuable than human philosophy. Every part of the Bible is given by inspiration of God. Therefore, it can, and should, be trusted.
I am under no delusion that the Bible was written ―through the imperfect expression of human language. That is, the Word of God is given in the words of men in history. Yet, at the same time, the Bible is itself the inspired Word of God, the only infallible rule for faith and practice, and that the character of the Bible must determine the appropriateness of critical methodologies.
In regard to the methods used for interpreting the Bible, I agree with G. Ladd that the method of interpretation is “Biblical Realism.” That is, one should make every attempt to understand the Bible from within its authors’ own ideas rather than to force the biblical message into modern thought forms. When it all said and done, the Bible should be its “own expositor.” CM
See Thought Resources:
George Eldon Ladd, The New Testament and Criticism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1967), 12, 15.
George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom, xiii.Well said.
-
@Dave_L said:
As Paul says "the letter (literal) kills but the Spirit gives life.So you think, Paul said that understanding what he wrote literally kills but the Spirit gives life?
Was Paul even referring to the difference between some kind of literal interpretation and spiritual interpretation (whatever that supposedly is)? Or was Paul using the two terms "letter" and "spirit" by means of a figure of speech to represent the old covenant law and the new covenant truths ? or something else perhaps?
-
The Holy Spirit gives understanding of what Paul or any wrote. The difference is in how unregenerate Jews derived totally different meanings from the same scriptures Jesus and the NT writers interpreted for us. Whoever would have thunk John the Baptist was Elijah?
There are many more examples but this should help us understand what Paul meant.
-
@Dave_L said:
Whoever would have thunk John the Baptist was Elijah?Even, John the Baptist (unregenerated?) did not believe he was Elijah for he denied it when asked ( John 1:21) unless of course, he was lying about his identity? And it seems that neither did the (unregenerated?)author of the book of Luke believe that John the Baptist was Elijah ( Luke 1:17 ) for there we read that John the Baptist would go forth in the power of Elijah not that he would somehow be Elijah reborn or reincarnated (an improbability since Elijah never died).
I recommend checking out what Walter C.Kaiser, Jr had to say in the Grace Theological Journal 3.2 (1982) . I think he offers some food for thought:
https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/gtj-nt/kaiser-gospels-elijah-gtj-82.pdf -
“From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and forceful people lay hold of it.For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John appeared.And if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah, who is to come. The one who has ears had better listen!” (Matthew 11:12–15)
-
Καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτόν, Τί οὖν; Ἠλίας εἶ σύ; Καὶ λέγει, Οὐκ εἰμί.
And they inquired of him who then? Are you Elijah? And he said No I am not (John 1:21a)καὶ αὐτὸς προελεύσεται ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐν πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει Ἠλίου
And he will go ahead before him in spirit and power of Elijah (1:17) -
@Mitchell said:
Καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτόν, Τί οὖν; Ἠλίας εἶ σύ; Καὶ λέγει, Οὐκ εἰμί.
And they inquired of him who then? Are you Elijah? And he said No I am not (John 1:21a)καὶ αὐτὸς προελεύσεται ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐν πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει Ἠλίου
And he will go ahead before him in spirit and power of Elijah (1:17)Thanks for the reply. What it all means is that Elijah was a physical symbol for the spiritual reality being fulfilled by John.
-
If Scripture had stated the above meaning then I would agree, however, the Scriptures I read do not even hint at such a meaning. I, however, respect that there are differences of belief and theology.
-
@Mitchell said:
If Scripture had stated the above meaning then I would agree, however, the Scriptures I read do not even hint at such a meaning. I, however, respect that there are differences of belief and theology.“And if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah, who is to come. The one who has ears had better listen!” (Matthew 11:14–15)
-
One: a word meaning "better" does not appear in the Greek text of Matthew 11:14-15.
And, Two: being that we have more Biblical texts on this matter than just Matthew chapter 11 I think we can understand Jesus words correctly after we read:
Καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτόν, Τί οὖν; Ἠλίας εἶ σύ; Καὶ λέγει, Οὐκ εἰμί.
And they inquired of him who then? Are you Elijah? And he said No I am not (John 1:21a)καὶ αὐτὸς προελεύσεται ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐν πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει Ἠλίου
And he will go ahead before him in spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17)If you haven't done so already I recommend reading the following for an educated Christian exegetical point of view on the matter:
https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/gtj-nt/kaiser-gospels-elijah-gtj-82.pdf -
@Mitchell said:
One: a word meaning "better" does not appear in the Greek text of Matthew 11:14-15.And, Two: being that we have more Biblical texts on this matter than just Matthew chapter 11 I think we can understand Jesus words correctly after we read:
Καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτόν, Τί οὖν; Ἠλίας εἶ σύ; Καὶ λέγει, Οὐκ εἰμί.
And they inquired of him who then? Are you Elijah? And he said No I am not (John 1:21a)καὶ αὐτὸς προελεύσεται ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐν πνεύματι καὶ δυνάμει Ἠλίου
And he will go ahead before him in spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17)If you haven't done so already I recommend reading the following for an educated Christian exegetical point of view on the matter:
https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/gtj-nt/kaiser-gospels-elijah-gtj-82.pdfJohn the Baptist and Elijah must be spiritually understood. This is why he said: "The one who has ears had better listen!"
-
@Dave_L said:
John the Baptist and Elijah must be spiritually understood. This is why he said: "The one who has ears had better listen!"What does "to spiritually understand" mean?? You seem to propose it means to not understand the text as what the text actually says and instead understand something else ?
Did God give you some special revelation via the Spirit about what the passages mean, and that "spiritual" insight/understanding contradicts what the text rather plainly says?I'll rather read what is written and endeavor to understand what is written in light of what the text says, what the context says, what figures of speech are involved, etc ...
-
Luke told me who John the Baptist was in spirit. “He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. And he will go as forerunner before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared for him.”” (Luke 1:16–17)
-
@Dave_L said:
John the Baptist and Elijah must be spiritually understood.You mean the concept of John the Baptist being Elijah much be understood in a figuratively. If so then I agree for John the Baptist was not literally the Elijah who was taken up into heaven.
@Dave_L said:
This is why he said: "The one who has ears had better listen!"One: the Scriptures I have read differently for the above for "had better" does not appear.
Two: Yes, It seems that Jesus/Yeshua was speaking figuratively unless the Bible is in conflict with its self over this issue. -
I agree. But it shows how OT writers did not always understand the meaning of what they wrote. I think it is something like 80% of fulfilled prophecies were not fulfilled as written.
-
@Dave_L said:
I agree. But it shows how OT writers did not always understand the meaning of what they wrote.I am not sure what part of what I wrote or what we discussed would lead to such a conclusion. Nor am I sure how we can be for certain what the original writers new apart from what they wrote. However, I would say that the Masorah of the Hebrew Bible more than often show that the Masoretes and ancient scribes did know what the text were speaking about.
-
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.
-
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
-
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end.Yet, no one on this thread said anything about technical skills.
-
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text.I hear this often about "God must grant understanding" ... as if careful consideration of what the text says after reading it carefully was almost meaningless
How does God give you understanding, sort of independent of applying careful reading and reasonable and logical thinking or even contradictory to reading etc?
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
1 In only eleven out of the ninety four cases are the fulfillments exactly as the writer described or foresaw. Thus, using Dr. Walvoord’s criterion of “seeking to discover how the original writer understood his prophecy, “ we would have been wrong over 88% of the time! When we analyze all these cases, we find that the fulfillments may be classified into five categories as follows: a. Natural events, fulfilled as described by the writer; thirteen cases. b. Natural events, but not fulfilled exactly as described or foreseen; eleven cases. c. Fulfilled by events both natural and spiritual, but never exactly as described or likely foreseen: sixteen cases. d. Fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm only, but not as described or likely foreseen: forty-three cases. e. Fulfillments cited in the N. T. as the general tenor of ‘, what the prophets have said”, and always fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm: eleven cases.
Robert Whitelaw. THE GOSPEL MILLENNIUM and Obedience to Scripture.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
1 In only eleven out of the ninety four cases are the fulfillments exactly as the writer described or foresaw. Thus, using Dr. Walvoord’s criterion of “seeking to discover how the original writer understood his prophecy, “ we would have been wrong over 88% of the time! When we analyze all these cases, we find that the fulfillments may be classified into five categories as follows: a. Natural events, fulfilled as described by the writer; thirteen cases. b. Natural events, but not fulfilled exactly as described or foreseen; eleven cases. c. Fulfilled by events both natural and spiritual, but never exactly as described or likely foreseen: sixteen cases. d. Fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm only, but not as described or likely foreseen: forty-three cases. e. Fulfillments cited in the N. T. as the general tenor of ‘, what the prophets have said”, and always fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm: eleven cases.
Robert Whitelaw. THE GOSPEL MILLENNIUM and Obedience to Scripture.
The other possibility is that they have not yet been fulfilled completely.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
1 In only eleven out of the ninety four cases are the fulfillments exactly as the writer described or foresaw. Thus, using Dr. Walvoord’s criterion of “seeking to discover how the original writer understood his prophecy, “ we would have been wrong over 88% of the time! When we analyze all these cases, we find that the fulfillments may be classified into five categories as follows: a. Natural events, fulfilled as described by the writer; thirteen cases. b. Natural events, but not fulfilled exactly as described or foreseen; eleven cases. c. Fulfilled by events both natural and spiritual, but never exactly as described or likely foreseen: sixteen cases. d. Fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm only, but not as described or likely foreseen: forty-three cases. e. Fulfillments cited in the N. T. as the general tenor of ‘, what the prophets have said”, and always fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm: eleven cases.
Robert Whitelaw. THE GOSPEL MILLENNIUM and Obedience to Scripture.
The other possibility is that they have not yet been fulfilled completely.
This is true but many look for fulfillments that will never happen. It is safer to accept the NT "that it might be fulfilled" than to speculate that it was not.
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
1 In only eleven out of the ninety four cases are the fulfillments exactly as the writer described or foresaw. Thus, using Dr. Walvoord’s criterion of “seeking to discover how the original writer understood his prophecy, “ we would have been wrong over 88% of the time! When we analyze all these cases, we find that the fulfillments may be classified into five categories as follows: a. Natural events, fulfilled as described by the writer; thirteen cases. b. Natural events, but not fulfilled exactly as described or foreseen; eleven cases. c. Fulfilled by events both natural and spiritual, but never exactly as described or likely foreseen: sixteen cases. d. Fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm only, but not as described or likely foreseen: forty-three cases. e. Fulfillments cited in the N. T. as the general tenor of ‘, what the prophets have said”, and always fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm: eleven cases.
Robert Whitelaw. THE GOSPEL MILLENNIUM and Obedience to Scripture.
The other possibility is that they have not yet been fulfilled completely.
This is true but many look for fulfillments that will never happen. It is safer to accept the NT "that it might be fulfilled" than to speculate that it was not.
How is that safer? And can you list an example?
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
1 In only eleven out of the ninety four cases are the fulfillments exactly as the writer described or foresaw. Thus, using Dr. Walvoord’s criterion of “seeking to discover how the original writer understood his prophecy, “ we would have been wrong over 88% of the time! When we analyze all these cases, we find that the fulfillments may be classified into five categories as follows: a. Natural events, fulfilled as described by the writer; thirteen cases. b. Natural events, but not fulfilled exactly as described or foreseen; eleven cases. c. Fulfilled by events both natural and spiritual, but never exactly as described or likely foreseen: sixteen cases. d. Fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm only, but not as described or likely foreseen: forty-three cases. e. Fulfillments cited in the N. T. as the general tenor of ‘, what the prophets have said”, and always fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm: eleven cases.
Robert Whitelaw. THE GOSPEL MILLENNIUM and Obedience to Scripture.
The other possibility is that they have not yet been fulfilled completely.
This is true but many look for fulfillments that will never happen. It is safer to accept the NT "that it might be fulfilled" than to speculate that it was not.
How is that safer? And can you list an example?
If Jesus, a NT writer, or an Apostle says a certain prophecy is fulfilled, or will be fulfilled within certain constraints, I do not look for a future fulfillment beyond the constraints. Can we remain true to the Word if we read into it ideas it does not mention?
-
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
What I'm saying is technical skills alone are a dead end. God must grant understanding of a text. As far as OT prophecies, I believe some 80% were not fulfilled as expected. So even the prophets didn't understand what they spoke of in most cases.Just curious, what do you base this assertion off of?
1 In only eleven out of the ninety four cases are the fulfillments exactly as the writer described or foresaw. Thus, using Dr. Walvoord’s criterion of “seeking to discover how the original writer understood his prophecy, “ we would have been wrong over 88% of the time! When we analyze all these cases, we find that the fulfillments may be classified into five categories as follows: a. Natural events, fulfilled as described by the writer; thirteen cases. b. Natural events, but not fulfilled exactly as described or foreseen; eleven cases. c. Fulfilled by events both natural and spiritual, but never exactly as described or likely foreseen: sixteen cases. d. Fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm only, but not as described or likely foreseen: forty-three cases. e. Fulfillments cited in the N. T. as the general tenor of ‘, what the prophets have said”, and always fulfilled by events in the spiritual realm: eleven cases.
Robert Whitelaw. THE GOSPEL MILLENNIUM and Obedience to Scripture.
The other possibility is that they have not yet been fulfilled completely.
This is true but many look for fulfillments that will never happen. It is safer to accept the NT "that it might be fulfilled" than to speculate that it was not.
How is that safer? And can you list an example?
If Jesus, a NT writer, or an Apostle says a certain prophecy is fulfilled, or will be fulfilled within certain constraints, I do not look for a future fulfillment beyond the constraints. Can we remain true to the Word if we read into it ideas it does not mention?
Can you list an example of what you were talking about though? One where the Bible says a prophecy is fulfilled but someone is claiming that it is not yet fulfilled?
-
The most obvious is the unbelieving Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah. Another would be Scofield saying God postponed the Kingdom when Scripture clearly shows it is here. “From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force.” (Matthew 11:12) etc. etc....
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
