SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Is everyone here Dispensational in their Eschatology?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 )
PosterThread
Chosen7Stone
Member



Joined: 2003/7/21
Posts: 268
FL, USA

 Re:

I think I'd like to rescind my previous post. Scripture is to be interpreted by Scripture, and it's not open to our own personal interpretation. According to 1 Corinthians 1, it's not a good idea to label ourselves either, unless we're calling ourselves followers of Christ and Him alone. Whatever happens happens -- God and His plan are perfect.


_________________
Mary M.

 2004/1/12 23:46Profile
-David
Member



Joined: 2004/1/9
Posts: 27


 Re:

Chosen7Stone Said: "I think I'd like to rescind my previous post. Scripture is to be interpreted by Scripture, and it's not open to our own personal interpretation. According to 1 Corinthians 1, it's not a good idea to label ourselves either, unless we're calling ourselves followers of Christ and Him alone. Whatever happens happens -- God and His plan are perfect."


How is it possible to not interpret scripture when reading it or studying it? I think you should interpret it using scripture as the guide by which you interpret scripture. Sola Scriptura is scripture alone but that does not mean you just need the Bible and never read it or study it. I do think I understand what you meant though. There is a wrong way to interpret scripture "isogesis" and a right way "exegesis", isogesis would be reading a meaning INTO the text or picking verses out of context in order to defend a position, exegesis is letting scripture interpret itself within context.

I don't know if I really label myself since the words I used were nothing more than the definition of what I hold to. For example I don't believe in a literal millennium so I am by definition amillennial, I do feel most of the prophecies in the book of Revelation have been fulfilled (not all, but most) so I am by definition a moderate or partial preterist. The two words are just the actual words to describe those two positions. amillennial literally means "no millennium" (A=no, such as amoral i.e. no morals), preterist literally means "One who believes the prophecies of the Apocalypse to have been already fulfilled." so by me saying I am a "partial or moderate preterist" that means I agree partially with the definition of preterisim when applied to the understanding of fulfilled prophecies in the book of Revelation but not fully. Sorry for my diatribe LOL.

-David

 2004/1/13 0:36Profile
sermonindex
Moderator



Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 37185
"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11

Online!
 Re:

Quote:
Scripture is to be interpreted by Scripture, and it's not open to our own personal interpretation.


Scripture is given by revelation of God not by the mind of men (personal interpretation):

[b]2 Peter 1:20-21 (niv)[/b] - Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

And the words of Scripture are spiritual and from above and cannot be understood fully by the carnal mind, it is spiritually discerned (interpreting spiritual truths to spiritual men):

[b]1 Corinthians 2:13-14 (niv)[/b] - This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Quote:
According to 1 Corinthians 1, it's not a good idea to label ourselves either, unless we're calling ourselves followers of Christ and Him alone.


I totally agree on the unity point, but the problem is that the Apostle Paul knew what He believed (even about the times) and the people he taught knew also what they believed. The problem is in the church today we have lost that knoweldge of the gospel somewhere down the line and only the plainly obvious in Scripture is the foundation of our beliefs and the rest are given up to human opinion. And I call it human opinion because of all the varying viewpoints on certain passages or principles in the bible.. ie eschatology (endtimes).

here is an example of believers [b]knowing[/b] a truth about the endtimes that we in our day can't come to an conclusive point:

[b]2 Thessalonians 2:5-6 (niv)[/b] - Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

The basic idea I am trying to drive at is that Paul had a Gospel message revealed to him from heaven (part of the gospel is the endtimes, the return of Jesus Christ to this earth). It was shown to Him from Jesus Christ (God). He was able to show this message to others such as Timothy who then in turn could tell others without diluting the clear message from heaven. But somewhere down the line we have lost that clear message and have come into confusion on certain doctrines of the Scripture.

[b]Galatians 1:11-12 (niv)[/b] - I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

[b]1 Timothy 1:11 (niv)[/b] - that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

[b]2 Timothy 2:2 (niv)[/b] - And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.


_________________
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon

 2004/1/13 9:37Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Greg wrote The problem is in the church today we have lost that knoweldge of the gospel somewhere down the line and only the plainly obvious in Scripture is the foundation of our beliefs and the rest are given up to human opinion. And I call it human opinion because of all the varying viewpoints on certain passages or principles in the bible.. ie eschatology (endtimes).

I think this is such an important point in our study and debate. I sometimes say that all topical Bible teaching should be called Bible Hypotheses. We are gathering together facts and producing a 'best fit'. The examples Greg gives are classic ones and in the face of these partial knowledge we really do need to constantly remind ourselves that "we know in part". That was Paul's testimony, how much more ours?

Topical Bible Study is somewhat unnatural in that we are doing something which the Bible doesn't do; assemble truth together to the exclusion of other truths. If you buy a manual you expect subjects to be gathered together under headings. All you need to know about baking bread will be in one chapter of the cookery book. But the Bible doesn't work like this. Truth can never be studied or defined in isolation from other truth. It is truth in isolation that creates heresies and cults.

Bible teachers have a great responsibility to understand that in extracting topical truth they are doing something which is unnatural to the Bible. It may be useful, but we need to put the truth back into context of all truth as quickly as possible.

Anyone who has not felt the weight of James's words ought not really to be teaching. My brethren, let not many of you become teachers, knowing that we shall receive a stricter judgment.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2004/1/13 10:03Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy