Steps in Mining a Biblical Passage

C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934
edited October 2018 in Biblical Studies

The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

Post edited by Jan on
«1

Comments

  • GaoLuGaoLu Posts: 1,367

    Better not to mine a passage, but to let the passage mine us. Better not to create steps to glean meaning, but to let the operation of God work in our hearts through reading the Word.

    On the other hand, here are some steps anyway:

    1. Know the big picture--read the whole thing through enough to know what it says.
    2. Get an idea of the context of a passage.
    3. Read a passage and let it soak in.

    (That isn't much, but its seed for more)

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @Dave_L said:

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

  • C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

  • GaoLuGaoLu Posts: 1,367

    That whole thing about Israel not understanding what they are saying reminds me of a story of the days when I sported a big beard and baggy work clothes and met two men one day on the street:

    Person A: [Addressing me] Hey, are you Amish?

    Me: No

    Person A to Person B: He is Amish. He just doesn't know it.

  • C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934

    @GaoLu said:
    Better not to mine a passage, but to let the passage mine us.

    Thanks for the starters. However, consider this:

    1. Is it not we are admonished to "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15).
    2. It is a special duty as well as a unique privilege to study the Word of God.
      the English translations give "study" for the Greek word "spoudazo".

    This is more often rendered:

    • "Do your utmost" (Moffatt).
    • "Endeavor" (Cunnington).

    Actually, it is more than "study" as such; it means:

    • "earnestly seek" (Weymouth)
    • "exert yourself" (Fenton).

    Robertson, in his Word Pictures, translates it as "give diligence. " It goes almost without saying, to study, it calls for the mobilization of all our mental and physical powers.

    In addition, to study, it calls for spiritual insight, and that, thank God, can be ours as we dedicate ourselves to the Lord and seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit to lead us into a fuller understanding of the Word of truth.

    At the time of the writing of 2 Tim. 3:15, Paul was referring to what we call the Old Testament. As time went on, the further revelation, His teachings, and those of His apostles were classified as "Scripture." (Notice "other scriptures" in 2 Peter 3:16.)

    These were part of God's revelation to humankind. This continued revelation now becomes the basis for our doctrinal teachings:

    • For our spiritual counsel
    • For our hope and comfort for today and for the future.

    In short, to study is read, re-read, reflect, compare, analyze, synthesize and make the application. One's presupposition will influence this and other methods.

    @GaoLu said: "Better not to create steps to glean meaning, but to let the operation of God work in our hearts through reading the Word".

    We endeavor to gather, bundle, collect nuggets of truths from the Word as a miner extract gold, coal, and iron ore from the earth. He doesn't make or create the substance. He develops tools and equipment to get it at the fastest, cost-effective way, and the greatest amount of materials. This the exegete does when it comes to Word. I invite your help. CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @C_M_ said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT. That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

  • GaoLuGaoLu Posts: 1,367

    Good post, @C_M_.

    As for steps, this commonly quoted notion is good.
    1. observation
    - what does it say (who what when where)?
    - multiple translations can help
    - look at theme, structure, emphasis, repetition, relationship of ideas
    4. interpretation
    - What does it mean?
    - Word studies, commentaries can help
    - Consider historical meaning, context, genre, tone, reason for writing
    - Consider Cross references, culture
    - Who, what, where, when, why?
    7. application
    - What am I going to do about it?
    - How does it change my relationship or behavior with God, others, myself, the devil?

  • C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934
    edited October 2018

    What does it mean to" rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15)? When viewed from a sober position, "Rightly dividing the Word" demands that in interpreting the Scriptures, the Bible student must:

    1. Not depart from the Word.
    2. Not doubt the Word.
    3. Adopt the right presuppositions and attitudes toward the Word.
    4. Uphold the plain reading of Scripture.

    I hope this adds to our understanding of mining the Word. CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @C_M_ said:
    What does it mean to" rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15)? When viewed from a sober position, "Rightly dividing the Word" demands that in interpreting the Scriptures, the Bible student must:

    1. Not depart from the Word.
    2. Not doubt the Word.
    3. Adopt the right presuppositions and attitudes toward the Word.
    4. Uphold the plain reading of Scripture.

    I hope this adds to our understanding of mining the Word. CM

    Agreed mostly, though #3 can be troublesome. Who determines what the right presuppositions are?

  • GaoLuGaoLu Posts: 1,367
    Rightly divide:
    Thinking of a tent maker “cut it straight.”
    “Handle it rightly” is apparently a reasonable thing for a typical person to do.
  • WolfgangWolfgang Posts: 1,622

    @C_M_ said:
    What does it mean to" rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15)? When viewed from a sober position, "Rightly dividing the Word" demands that in interpreting the Scriptures, the Bible student must:

    1. Not depart from the Word.

    So everybody I have come to know claims to not depart from the Word ... while some claim that those who deviate from their understanding have departed from the Word.
    So now what?

    1. Not doubt the Word.

    So everybody I have come to know claims to not doubt the Word ... while some claim that those who deviate from their understanding do doubt the Word.
    So now what?

    1. Adopt the right presuppositions and attitudes toward the Word.

    So everybody I have come to know claims to adopt the right presuppositions and attitudes toward the Word ... while some claim that those who deviate from their understanding have not adopted such presuppositions and attitudes toward the Word.
    So now what?

    1. Uphold the plain reading of Scripture.

    So everybody I have come to know claims to uphold the plain reading of Scripture ... while some claim that those who deviate from their understanding do not uphold the plain reading of Scripture.
    So now what?

    I hope this adds to our understanding of mining the Word. CM

    Well ... see above ....

  • WolfgangWolfgang Posts: 1,622

    @GaoLu said:
    As for steps, this commonly quoted notion is good.
    1. observation
    - what does it say (who what when where)?
    - multiple translations can help
    - look at theme, structure, emphasis, repetition, relationship of ideas
    4. interpretation
    - What does it mean?
    - Word studies, commentaries can help
    - Consider historical meaning, context, genre, tone, reason for writing
    - Consider Cross references, culture
    - Who, what, where, when, why?
    7. application
    - What am I going to do about it?
    - How does it change my relationship or behavior with God, others, myself, the devil?

    IF such steps are indeed used and adhered to, I would think that such would be very helpful. Unfortunately, such steps are sometimes claimed in words and yet immediately disregarded or even denied in what is then done ... and someone who differs in understanding is often accused of being in error even though that person points out such as details such as who what when where, structure, word meanings, etc

  • GaoLuGaoLu Posts: 1,367

    @Wolfgang said:

    @GaoLu said:
    As for steps, this commonly quoted notion is good.
    1. observation
    - what does it say (who what when where)?
    - multiple translations can help
    - look at theme, structure, emphasis, repetition, relationship of ideas
    4. interpretation
    - What does it mean?
    - Word studies, commentaries can help
    - Consider historical meaning, context, genre, tone, reason for writing
    - Consider Cross references, culture
    - Who, what, where, when, why?
    7. application
    - What am I going to do about it?
    - How does it change my relationship or behavior with God, others, myself, the devil?

    IF such steps are indeed used and adhered to, I would think that such would be very helpful. Unfortunately, such steps are sometimes claimed in words and yet immediately disregarded or even denied in what is then done ... and someone who differs in understanding is often accused of being in error even though that person points out such as details such as who what when where, structure, word meanings, etc

    Certainly, what you say is so. That is why I made my first post above, that there is also another practice which may be efficacious in connecting with the Word of God.

    Yet another factor regarding your post to C_M_: People claim many things, but not everyone is telling the truth(such as--"...some claim that those who deviate from their understanding do not uphold the plain reading of Scripture"). I think that telling the untruth may apply in some cases.

    The application of all that is for each of us to search our own hearts regarding the matter.

  • WolfgangWolfgang Posts: 1,622

    @GaoLu said:
    As for steps, this commonly quoted notion is good.
    1. observation
    - what does it say (who what when where)?
    - multiple translations can help
    - look at theme, structure, emphasis, repetition, relationship of ideas

    Read Joh 17 ... records a prayer which Jesus prayed to God (or did he not pray to his God?), time shortly before his arrest.
    Rather emphatically, Jesus addresses his heavenly Father as the true God, putting emphasis on the truth that the Father ALONE is the only person who is true God.

    1. interpretation
      • What does it mean?
      • Word studies, commentaries can help
      • Consider historical meaning, context, genre, tone, reason for writing
      • Consider Cross references, culture
      • Who, what, where, when, why?

    The meaning is stated in rather plain words and easy to understand language. All translations in their wording reflect the same truth that Jesus recognizes and states that the Father is the ONLY one who is true God.
    Jesus statement is in accordance with the overall scope of Scripture, any other passage relating to the same matter agrees and confirms that the Father ALONE is the true God, thereby excluding any other person from being true God or being also (in addition to the Father) true God .

    1. application
      • What am I going to do about it?
      • How does it change my relationship or behavior with God, others, myself, the devil?

    The application for a person will depend on their current position and beliefs .... should the person deviate in some manner from the truth stated by Jesus in his prayer as recorded in John 17:3, the person would be well advised to change their beliefs in order to agree with Scripture instead of remaining in a position of adhering to a false doctrine.
    One's relationship to God would then be based on truth rather than false doctrine. One's relationship to others will most likely depend on the others and the treatment they want to give. One's relationship with oneself would be one of assurance as always found when resting on truth. One's relationship to the devil would be most likely depend on how one will deal with onslaughts and evil behavior of the devil's advocates (in churches usually seen quickly by being kicked out, isolated, any social contacts cut, etc.)

  • C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934

    There must be an intake of Scrip­tures: hearing, reading and studying. The Bible tells us in John 8:31, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” In order to live a victorious Christian life, every Christian believer must have a solid understanding of the spiritual significance of the Word of God. It must be allowed to transform their thinking (Rom 12:1-2). The sincere student of the Word must “Study to shew thyself approved unto God..." (2 Timothy 2:15).

    Macchia says that this type of study is the “discipline of purposeful Bible study reading.
    the Word of God is for more than to prove a point, to teach/preach a lesson, or to make them look spiritual. The Word of God is:

    • The written logos, providing the revelation of the entire Godhead (let's not get lost here)
    • Provides direction for life on earth (Ps 25:8; 19:8; 119:105; Prov 6:23)
    • Necessary for spiritual growth (Jer 15:16; 1 Pt 2:2; 1 Cor 3:1,2)
    • Necessary for effective service (Jos 1:8-9)
    • Necessary for the discipling others (2 Ti 2:2; 1 Pt 3:15)

    One’s insight into Scriptures will deepen and one will better understand how it applies to their life. The more one applies the truth of Scripture, the more one will become like Jesus. When it comes to the Word of God, we must pray for a heart to:

    • -- Hear (Lk. 11:28; Rom 10:17; 1 Tim 4:13).
    • -- Read (2 Tm 3:16; Rev 1:3).
    • -- Study (Ez 7:10; Acts 17:11; 2 Tim 4:13).

    This prayer must be followed with disciplined engagement in this practice on a daily basis just like Ezra (Ezr. 7:1); the Bereans (Acts 17:11); Paul (1 Tim. 4:13).

    GaoLu's suggestions and ones from others could help in our quest to achieve the above objectives and mine the Bible for its value and revelation as God intended. CM (2)

    SOURCE:
    --Stephen A. Macchia, Becoming A Healthy Church (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 72.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @C_M_ said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT. That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    In the OT the temple is brick and mortar. In the NT it is Jesus and Believers.... In the OT the kingdom is physical, in the NT it is spiritual.. and so on. This is why prophecy buffs with wild imaginations add to Revelation when they read OT definitions into it.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    If you ignore anything Jesus says, how safe a hermeneutic is that?

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    If you ignore anything Jesus says, how safe a hermeneutic is that?

    I didn't say that Dave.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    If you ignore anything Jesus says, how safe a hermeneutic is that?

    I didn't say that Dave.

    People who believe in a physical "millennial" kingdom ignore everything Jesus said about the kingdom. If you consider him first, all of the false prophecies created by Dispensationalists evaporate back into thin air where they came from.

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    If you ignore anything Jesus says, how safe a hermeneutic is that?

    I didn't say that Dave.

    People who believe in a physical "millennial" kingdom ignore everything Jesus said about the kingdom. If you consider him first, all of the false prophecies created by Dispensationalists evaporate back into thin air where they came from.

    That is simply not true. If you want to start a different thread feel free to, but don't derail this thread as @C_M_ has a good topic going here.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @C_M_ said:
    The Christian Bible, with its 66 books, is a little library, encased within one book. Each book of the Bible have chapters, verses, a theme, meaning, and a message. How does one mine these books, chapters, and verses without misrepresenting the author's message to the original audience and secure the message for our time and make present-day applications? Other than figures of speech (see Wolfgang's latest thread), which is only a fraction of the process, what steps should be taken to glean meaning and understanding to "rightly divide the Word"? Any suggestions and/or resources? CM

    The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind.

    That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    If you ignore anything Jesus says, how safe a hermeneutic is that?

    I didn't say that Dave.

    People who believe in a physical "millennial" kingdom ignore everything Jesus said about the kingdom. If you consider him first, all of the false prophecies created by Dispensationalists evaporate back into thin air where they came from.

    That is simply not true. If you want to start a different thread feel free to, but don't derail this thread as @C_M_ has a good topic going here.

    I'm only pointing out that Jesus defines the kingdom for us. And how we can be led astray not reading him first. Perfectly in sync with my other approved posts in this thread.

  • C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934
    edited October 2018

    A Note of Caution In Mining the Scriptures!

    It may be helpful for all to re-read my posts on presuppositions (assumptions or conclusions). When it comes to the Bible, all presuppositions must be examined for validity.

    1. Everyone approaches the Bible with his or her own assumptions or conclusions.
    2. Every theological system is based on the presuppositions of their favorite theologian or group of theologians?
    3. Unfortunately, all groups believe that their presuppositions are valid according to some standard, whether it be the Bible or the prevailing philosophical system such as Existentialism, Platonic Objectivism, or Subjective Rationalism, etc.

    I stated before, elsewhere:

    @C_M_ said: Like the winds of a nor'easter (a macro-scale cyclone), the Bible has been surrounded by a wide variety of traditions and traditional interpretations. The exegete may be tempted to read the text in light of his/her own tradition without critical judgment or without letting the text speak afresh on its own. “Bringing out from the text what is already there is called exposition; the technical name is exegesis. Reading into the text one's opinions, ideas, or assumptions is known an imposition; the technical term is eisegesis...”

    It is the presuppositions, not the tools, that determine the conclusion.

    I will say again, we must give close attention to our presuppositions when we come to explore the meaning of the text. Some may use the vehicles of:

    • Source Criticism -- an investigation into the author's sources.
    • Redaction Criticism -- seeks to find out how the author edited those sources.

    In truth, there is more than one legitimate way to approach Scripture:

    • The critical analysis of the scholar
    • The reverential synthesis of the witness.

    Just like there are two very different ways of understanding a person.

    1. One approach is the analytical, anatomical approach of the physician.
    2. Another quite different approach is that of the affectionate friend.

    I will share my preferred approach or vehicle of biblical interpretation the next time. CM (3)

  • C_M_C_M_ Posts: 2,934

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @C_M_ said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

    Good catch, yes that is what I intended to say. Thanks.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @C_M_ said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

    Good catch, yes that is what I intended to say. Thanks.

    Who might be best at interpreting the OT? Jesus or Darby?

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @C_M_ said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

    Good catch, yes that is what I intended to say. Thanks.

    Who might be best at interpreting the OT? Jesus or Darby?

    Dave start a new topic.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @C_M_ said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

    Good catch, yes that is what I intended to say. Thanks.

    Who might be best at interpreting the OT? Jesus or Darby?

    Dave start a new topic.

    My posts are on topic. I'm using modern day examples showing how people "strip mine" the bible instead of "step mine" it.

  • reformedreformed Posts: 2,221

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @C_M_ said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

    Good catch, yes that is what I intended to say. Thanks.

    Who might be best at interpreting the OT? Jesus or Darby?

    Dave start a new topic.

    My posts are on topic. I'm using modern day examples showing how people "strip mine" the bible instead of "step mine" it.

    Actually you have gone down a rabbit trail that is RELATED to the topic, but not on topic. Specifically you want to talk about the end times interpretations and how they relate to the Kingdom of God and whether it is physical or spiritual or both.

  • Dave_LDave_L Posts: 2,309

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @Dave_L said:

    @reformed said:

    @C_M_ said:

    @Dave_L said: "The safe way is to define terms from the New Testament. And then read the OT with this in mind. Jesus and the NT writers show that the OT writers often did not understand what they were saying. So If you define Israel, the kingdom of God, David's Throne, the Temple, and restoration of Israel and so forth, from a NT perspective, little will resemble what the prophets and writers had in mind".

    @reformed said: That's not a safe hermeneutical approach at all, nor is it accurate.

    @CM said: Then, tell us, Mr. Reformed, if what Dave said, is not so. What is "a safe hermeneutical approach" and "accurate" steps or methods? CM

    Reformed, you said:

    "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the NT". That isn't the case. They harmonize. I also don't think there is any evidence that the OT writers didn't know what they were talking about unless you are talking about specific future prophecies. They might not have known the details, we don't know. You need to look at a passage how the original audience would have understood the passage.

    Reformed, did you intended to make this second "NT" in your statement above to be "OT"? If not please explain. Therefore, saying, "Dave seems to think, from what I have read on these forums, that the NT overrides or corrects the OT..."

    Is this what you intended to say? CM

    Good catch, yes that is what I intended to say. Thanks.

    Who might be best at interpreting the OT? Jesus or Darby?

    Dave start a new topic.

    My posts are on topic. I'm using modern day examples showing how people "strip mine" the bible instead of "step mine" it.

    Actually you have gone down a rabbit trail that is RELATED to the topic, but not on topic. Specifically you want to talk about the end times interpretations and how they relate to the Kingdom of God and whether it is physical or spiritual or both.

    There are other examples but I'm using today's most prevailing error as an example of what CM is speaking of.

Sign In or Register to comment.