No Comment Allowed...
I just attempted to post a comment on "Slice of Laodicia". Reading that cite usually gets my dander up, but I often visit it anyway. And I confess, I've been know to write some rather sarcastic comments there and lately my comments haven't been posted.
I just didn't want this particular comment to be lost in cyberspace if the author of the cite found it unacceptable, so I cut and past it here:
I am blessed to say that the last three churches I attended held the Word of God in the highest regard. The Word was sung and read and preached on in great depth.(Hebrews 4:12).Please allow me to make two comments concerning two comments here. Renee indicated that we should be asking, not "what does this say to me" but rather "what does this mean - period". I agree. But I think we should be careful with the word "mean". Not so much, what does this mean, but what does this say?" It always means what it says - right? Yet so often you hear people arguing about what it means, not what it says. And Chris, if we do not need to take into consideration it's historical and cultural context or the depth of meaning in the original languages which is often lost in the limitations of the English language...can we truly understand what it "means"...what was being said by the people who originally said it? I don't think approaching Scripture in this way is in anyway a tactic to rid the church of sola scriptura...and when you speak of the "literal word" what language is that "literal word" written in?
13 comments:
Cultural/historical/linguistic context is secondary.
I ask for the umpteenth time, where is the Holy Spirit?
Knowing the original language, (which is doubtful as Moses' language was/is a lot different than modern Hebrew) is meaningless, if the Holy Spirit is not the one bringing the revelation.
My point is, and has always been, that scholarship submits to the revelation of the Holy Spirit. I am not living in first century Israel, so what does that mean to me?
Are we saying that the Scripture has no meaning today? What about someone who is given a Bible and has no instruction, other than read it? If they have no knowledge of culture or history, but they are spirit-filled, than the Holy Spirit will bring the meaning.
Contrary to popular opinion, the Scriptures are what Deut 29:29 states as "what is revealed to us,
which is for us, and our children so that we may keep the words of the Law."
The Bible was meant to be hidden from those who do not believe only, not the church. That is why I will never buy into the "agree to disagree" garbage.
I always approach it from, what does it actually say. It is not hard at all.
Where is the Holy Spirit? Wow, that is a huge question isn't it?
The Holy Spirit was with each writer of Scripture, since all scripture is God Breathed. The Holy Spirit manifested Himself at Pentacost, with a holy wind and tongues of fire. The Holy Spirit convicts the unsaved and comforts the saved...and we could go on and on and on...
Ofcourse, modern hebrew is a lot different than the language in which the Torah was written, as is modern greek different from the greek of the New Testament. For years and years, people who went into the ministry, in most all denominations, were required to learn ancient hebrew and greek to prepare them to be responsible teachers of the Word.
By the way, I believe that Faith Comes from hearing (not necessarily reading) and hearing from the Word of God, and that being Spirit Filled comes after Salvation.
I too approach the Bible from what it actually says, and when I come across places that seem to contradict each other, or places that I find hard to understand, I dig deeper. Sometimes Cultural/historical/linguistic context helps at these times.
I will confess to having a certin Bias. I believe that God is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all. I believe that Love is from God and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God, for God is Love. That Jesus came and died for "who so ever" and that when He was lifted up on that bloody cross is was to draw all men unto Him. I believe that YHWH is a covenant making and covenant keeping God. I also believe that when Joshua said to the Jews "choose for yourselves today whom you will serve" they actually had a choice. And so do I.
Of course I don't believe that God is light etc. etc etc. I don't dig deeper either. I just go by what I FEEL. I resent the inferences.
You would not know any of this had it not been written down. We hear what has ben written, which of course was first heard.
The Holy Spirit reveals the Scripture to us since it is written through His inpsiration.
How come no one ever answers the real question?
It sems tha Apostles had no trouble agreeing omn what they had writtenm. Why does the church today?
Since God knew that there would be believers today (or is that foreknowledge He did not have?) would He not allow the true church understanding of His word regardless of the day and culture it was written in?
BTW Joshua was speaking to the "chosen people".
and by the way, even God's chosen people had a choice.
I was giving my Bias - not attacking Chris P. or anyone else.
I am a bit confused by your comment though Chris, do we know this by reading the word, hearing the word, or through the revelation of the Holy Spirit...of couse it takes all three, right? And once a person comes to the saving Knowledge of Jesus - the Word made flesh - this reading, hearing, and trusting the Holy Spirit continues through out a persons life...no one ever knows it all, ever.
And the apostles agreed? of course, they were living and breathing it, they fully understood it. What is making the church impotent today is that no one agrees with anyone. Little pockets of pseudo Christians grab hold of some doctrine or tradition and close their eyes and their church doors. And if a Church is big, reaching out to the fallen world, trying to be a light in this dark and depraved world, they are blasted by people who think churches are for God's people and it doesn't matter what the world thinks.
I am not accusing any one person or any one church. I've been blessed, as I started out saying in this cite, with pastors who preached sound Biblical truths, Pastor Eric, Fr. Carl, even Pastor Art. I've been blessed to be part of churches where Scripture has been/ is read, studied, sung, prayed. And I have seen pastors and churches suffer because their pastors refuse to tickle ears, or soft soap the Truth. I agreed with the original statements made on slice by John McArthur concerning the need for solid Biblical teaching. I agreed with Renee who incinuated that we can't build our churches or our faith on how we feel about Scripture or God, but rather on what the Bible says. I just don't think that approaching Scripture in a Cultural/historical/linguistic way is in anyway a tactic to rid the church of sola scriptura...
Just to clairify the flow of these comments...
Pastor Art responded to Chris P.'s first comment, brokm is really me, commenting on Chris P.'s second comment...
And it's time to leave for church.
maryellen
"You would not know any of this had it not been written down. We hear what has ben written, which of course was first heard."
Somewhat circular. So was it the hearing or the reading that carried the message? Both would have to qualify. If one road was faulty, the example you give would result in a flawed message.
Oddly, though, you state it would not have been known to us if not written down. In other words, the Holy Spirit couldn't have spoken to us as you claim with certainty it can to give us the correct interpretation. Again, the structure of your argument seems (I may be incorrect, but it seems) to be a little shaky.
As for knowledge of language and setting, it would seem that this would be indispensable. As Pastor Art has indicated, it is the only way for the story to last unchanging through the ages while our languages, culture and etc... change. Even if the words changed to keep up, it would be lost in the telephone game. The words have to remain the same, and the setting has to be acknowledged, then us thinking individuals can peace together what God was saying to us.
How unusual - Pope Ingrid not allowing someone to post! Couldn't see anything offensive in your post as far as they are concerned. Here, however, is the reality. It's all about them over there.
There was a post about hymns last week and a discussion about the early church hymns - Catholic Hymns - and Chris P. posted two paragraphs that had the words "I" or "me" in it 10 times! Think about that! It's not about what Holy Mother Church teaches - it's about what "I think" or "according to the Scriptures as I interpret them." Talking about the Holy Spirit- where is the Holy Ghost in that mentality?
to be fair, Ingrid did post that comment. i tried hard to make it as neutral as possible, and I honestly did have a question or two that weren't answered. i didn't want to get into a personal debate with chris p again, but considereing the fact that Pastor Art is one of those who he knows personally who takes the Historical, Cultural, and Linguistic aspects of Scripture very seriously, I wanted to make it clear that people who think this way are not seeking to undermine Sola Scriptura.
maryellen
I love asking my husband about the Greek words...he took some Greek in college and he is also a linguist of several languages. I agree that studying the meanings can give a richer understanding of scripture. I also agree that the Holy Spirit will teach us greatly just by reading. I get something new each time I read. And studying gives me even more.
The Word of God is living and true. So of course we can get "something new" everytime we read it. And the more we dig, the more we get. What is the difference though, between getting something new and getting something different? What is the difference between getting something new and the idea of "what does it mean to me, now, at this point of my life." ???
I agree with your comment about trying to figure out "what does it say?". I think however that does not mean we leave aside "what does it say for me?". God still speaks to his people and he very often uses his written word to do it. After we figure out what it says and what it says for me, the question needs to be asked, "Is there something I am supposed to do as a result of understanding what was said?" I think God is always being a missional God and so very likely he may be asking perhaps for a change of heart or behavior, an increase in obedience, a promt to serve those around us or give witness to his glory. He of course may be giving us words of comfort and affirmation and love as well which I suppose could be said is part of the mission to love him more.
Post a Comment