|
URForgiven -> RE: What is the difference between theology and spiritual revelation (7/10/2008 10:57:58 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: theo_book quote:
ORIGINAL: URForgiven You can read anything you can imagine into the Word. And entire cults and denominations have been built on the errant interpretations of just one sentence. Our struggle is to only read out of the Word. There is no "special revelation". In other words the Holy Spirit does not reveal one meaning to one person and another meaning to someone else. Without exception, errant interpretations will always be made obvious by the comparing of scripture to scripture. Obvious to those who are not blinded by their preconceptions, but hidden from those that are. There are not multiple meanings, but there is depth to what is revealed that can have multiple applications. After all, what is contained there originates in the mind of God, and I would expect nothing less; nor can I ever hope to grasp it all, but can only be content with the little that has been made known. Peace "Not multiple meanings but multiple applications." I like that. Does that mean that since we agree we are probably both wrong? (kidding) One of the most misunderstood and misquoted passages in scripture is John 21:15-17 I have heard many times that since Peter denied Jesus three times, Jesus made Peter admit his love for him three times. THAT is vindictive, not love. THAT is not my Lord. The truth of the matter is found in a proper translation, which is lacking in the King James Version. "So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. 17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. Look at it now properly translated: Simon, son of Jonas, are you devoted to me? Peter responded "Yes Lord, I have affection for you." He saith to him, feed my lambs." 16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, are you devoted to me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I have affection for thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. 17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, do you have affection for me? Peter was grieved because the third time, Jesus questioned his affection. And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I have affection for thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. Notice two things here. First: Jesus enquired about "agape" devotion; Peter responded with "Phileo" affection. The third time, since Peter's devotion was not forthcoming, his affection was questioned. And Second: Peter at first was trusted to teach or "feed" the lambs. After his failure to grow from affection to devotion, he was only qualified to teach the fully grown sheep, no longer the young lambs. I think this message is available to all of God's children, but when we depend upon men to tell us what the Greek says (or the Hebrew) we begin to lose the depth of the messages contained therein. This does not mean I have to know Greek or Hebrew, it means I have to make available to my study, those languages for verification. What say ye? I understand what you are saying, it is definitely helpful to have the original meaning of each word available to us. Here comes the but...but, there are many whose native languages are Greek and Hebrew, and still, they do not have a clue as to the meaning of what is being said. And meaning is everything. When those words [which we can know their original meanings], are placed together in sentences, it then becomes not a matter of what does this word mean, but of what do these words that are placed together in this way mean? What is the thought behind the words? For that thought is the mind of God. The jots and tittles are important in that they express a thought, which is truth, but to get caught up in the jots and tittles themselves is to miss the forest for the trees. That was and is the Jews snaggletooth. They spent generation after generation deciphering every nuance of every word, and when "The Word" was standing right in front of them, they couldn't even see Him. Not sure what my point is in all that. Except that without the illumination of the Holy Spirit, it is impossible to know what the Word means. I do not think that means we shouldn't use everything at our disposal to get at the truth contained within the Word. But even then it will be the Holy Spirit who is prodding us to know, and who is allowing us to see the truth no matter if it is directly through the Word or through someone else's sharing with us what the Holy Spirit has revealed to them about the Word. That's all I got... Peace
|
|
|
|