Submitted by Georgie Porgie
Any truly valid interpretation of Scripture must be based upon sound rules. These rules must then be applied consistently. The following are the most basic rules we attempt to always follow in our interpretation of Scripture. We do not feel at liberty to discard these rules when they lead us to a conclusion in contradiction to what ‘orthodoxy’ has taught us. We instead endeavour to allow the scriptures to speak for themselves and believe by faith whatever conclusions they may lead us to.
I It will be assumed that the 39 books of the Old Testament, and the 27 Books of the New Testament are the wholly inspired Word of God. “That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” 2 Tim 3:17.
II The Bible itself will always be used to define its own terminology, symbols, etc. No appeal will be made to any man-made dogma, theory, or writing, such as the apocrypha or psudopygrypha, to explain Biblical terms which are already clearly defined within the Bible itself.
III The proper interpretation of any given passage will be determined, not only by that with which it stands immediately connected, but by considering all scriptures which have bearing upon the subject throughout the entire Bible . The truth of any given subject can only be determined by bringing together all scripture which sheds light on that subject.
IV Every passage will be given as literal an interpretation as possible, unless such a literal interpretation would render the meaning absurd, or bring it into disagreement with other passages which speak in positive language.
V No interpretation will be given to any scripture beyond what the fair meaning of the text itself allows. For Example: Carcass cannot in any case be interpreted to mean immortal soul burning in hell.
VI All passages belonging to any particular subject must contain one or more of the peculiar features of that subject, by which it may be identified as belonging to that subject.
VII The truth of any doctrine must be determined firstly by those passages which speak in clear and positive language, and not those which are symbolic or parabolic in nature. No inference should be drawn from any symbolic or parabolic passage which would bring the passage into contradiction with those which speak unequivocally on the same subject.
VIII No doctrine will be derived based on a single passage of scripture, a mere inference, or an argument from silence. Any true doctrine will found throughout the entire Bible.
Fundamental Rules for Interpreting Scripture
1. Since Jesus spoke and the Bible writers wrote primarily for the people of their day, always consider the historical, geographical, and cultural setting of the passage you are studying.
2. Always consider the context of the unit, chapter, and book when interpreting a text. The meaning of each verse must agree with the theme of the unit, chapter, and book, as well as the overall teaching of the Bible.
3. When interpreting a passage or verse, make sure to study each sentence grammatically to get the correct meaning. Pay special attention to the verbs as they deal with actions.
4. Make sure to get the meaning of each text as intended by the Bible writer or inspired speaker before making application. This is called bridge-building and is important in giving Bible studies.
5. Difficult texts must be interpreted in the light of the clear teachings of the whole Bible. Therefore, study all that Scripture teaches on a given subject before coming to a conclusion on any single verse.
6. The New Testament must be interpreted in the light of the Old Testament and vice versa. The Old Testament is promise and the New Testament is fulfilment. Both complement each other.
7. For accuracy, use the best translations and, if at all possible, compare with the original text.
Here are the eight rules:
1) The rule of DEFINITION: What does the word mean? Any study of Scripture must begin with a study of words. Define your terms and then keep to the terms defined. The interpreter should conscientiously abide by the plain meaning of the words. This quite often may require using a Hebrew/English or Greek/English lexicon in order to make sure that the sense of the English translation is understood. A couple of good examples of this are the Greek words “allos” and “heteros”. Both are usually translated as “another” in English – yet “allos” literally means “another of the same type” and “heteros” means “another of a different type.”
2) The rule of USAGE: It must be remembered that the Old Testament was written originally by, to and for Jews. The words and idioms must have been intelligible to them – just as the words of Christ when talking to them must have been. The majority of the New Testament likewise was written in a milieu of Greco-Roman (and to a lesser extent Jewish) culture and it is important to not impose our modern usage into our interpretation. It is not worth much to interpret a great many phrases and histories if one’s interpretations are shaded by pre-conceived notions and cultural biases, thereby rendering an inaccurate and ineffectual lesson.
3) The rule of CONTEXT: The meaning must be gathered from the context. Every word you read must be understood in the light of the words that come before and after it. Many passages will not be understood at all, or understood incorrectly, without the help afforded by the context. A good example of this is the Mormon practice of using 1 Cor. 8:5b: “…for there be gods many and lords many…” as a “proof text” of their doctrine of polytheism. However, a simple reading of the whole verse in the context of the whole chapter (e.g. where Paul calls these gods “so-called”), plainly demonstrates that Paul is not teaching polytheism.
4) The rule of HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The interpreter must have some awareness of the life and society of the times in which the Scripture was written. The spiritual principle will be timeless but often can’t be properly appreciated without some knowledge of the background. If the interpreter can have in his mind what the writer had in his mind when he wrote – without adding any excess baggage from the interpreter’s own culture or society – then the true thought of the Scripture can be captured resulting in an accurate interpretation. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “Our only interest in the past is for the light it throws upon the present.”
5) The rule of LOGIC: Interpretation is merely logical reasoning. When interpreting Scripture, the use of reason is everywhere to be assumed. Does the interpretation make sense? The Bible was given to us in the form of human language and therefore appeals to human reason – it invites investigation. It is to be interpreted as we would any other volume: applying the laws of language and grammatical analysis. As Bernard Ramm said:
“What is the control we use to weed out false theological speculation? Certainly the control is logic and evidence… interpreters who have not had the sharpening experience of logic…may have improper notions of implication and evidence. Too frequently such a person uses a basis of appeal that is a notorious violation of the laws of logic and evidence.” (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, Boston: W. A. Wilde, 1956)
6) The rule of PRECEDENT: We must not violate the known usage of a word and invent another for which there is no precedent. Just as a judge’s chief occupation is the study of previous cases, so must the interpreter use precedents in order to determine whether they really support an alleged doctrine. Consider the Bereans in Acts 17:10-12 who were called “noble” because they searched the Scriptures to determine if what Paul taught them was true.
7) The rule of UNITY: The parts of Scripture being interpreted must be construed with reference to the significance of the whole. An interpretation must be consistent with the rest of Scripture. An excellent example of this is the doctrine of the Trinity. No single passage teaches it, but it is consistent with the teaching of the whole of Scripture (e.g. the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are referred to individually as God; yet the Scriptures elsewhere teach there is only one God).
8) The rule of INFERENCE: An inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a logical consequence. It derives a conclusion from a given fact or premise. It is the deduction of one proposition from another proposition. Such inferential facts or propositions are sufficiently binding when their truth is established by competent and satisfactory evidence. Competent evidence means such evidence as the nature of the thing to be proved admits. Satisfactory evidence means that amount of proof which would ordinarily satisfy an unprejudiced mind beyond a reasonable doubt. Jesus used this rule when he proved the resurrection of the dead to the unbelieving Sadducees in Matt. 22:23-33.
Learning these eight rules and properly applying them will help keep any interpreter from making errors and will hopefully alleviate many of the disagreements unfortunately present in Christianity today. However, these eight principles are no substitute for the Holy Spirit which will, if you let Him, guide you in the truth [John 14:26]. If you receive Christ into your heart, God will give you the Holy Spirit freely as a gift [Acts 2:38]. I urge you, if you have not already done so, to examine the claims and the work of Jesus Christ and to receive Him as your Saviour.
Interpreting Scripture (Hermeneutics)
Hermeneutics is defined in one dictionary as “the art of finding the meaning of an author’s words and phrases, and of explaining it to others.” When applied to Scripture, accurate hermeneutics would require the scholar to:
• Study the context of the passage and the theme of the book.
• Look up the actual meaning of each word in the original languages.
• Note the verb tenses, the cases, and other grammatical determinants.
• Learn the cultural setting of the passage.
• Determine what the original readers understood it to mean.
• Check out cross-references to see how the words are used in other contexts.
• See how the first mention of the word or topic is presented in the Bible.
• Confirm an interpretation with two or three similar passages.
These are all proven study methods and good guidelines of interpretation. Here are some other additional factors of correct Biblical hermeneutics?
1. Spiritual Perception Over Intellectual Understanding
The first factor of interpreting Scripture is to approach it as an exercise in spiritual discernment rather than just an intellectual pursuit. Paul emphasized this in his letter to the Corinthian believers. “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (I Corinthians 2:14). Jesus Himself confirmed that Biblical understanding does not come from human reasoning but from spiritual enlightenment. He said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes” (Matthew 11:25).
The Holy Spirit is the One Who inspired the writing of Scripture, and He is the most qualified One to interpret its meaning to each reader. Jesus assured us that the Holy Spirit would indeed guide us into all truth. “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13).
This being the case, it is also reasonable to conclude that if a person who wants to interpret Scripture has sinful habits or practices in his life that grieve the Holy Spirit and quench His power, the Holy Spirit will not reveal the truth of Scripture to such a person. In fact, God warns that such individuals will take Scripture out of context to their own destruction. (See II Peter 3:16.) This result supports the axiom that a man’s morality will dictate his theology and his philosophy.
2. God’s Revelation Over Human Reasoning
In the final analysis, accurate Biblical interpretation is based on the revelation of Jesus Christ throughout the Scriptures. Nowhere is this more clearly demonstrated than on that walk on the road to Emmaus. The disciples had been personally taught by Jesus for three years.
However, they still did not understand the Scriptures from which He taught. They were distracted by the conflicting interpretations of contemporary scholars. It was not until Jesus began with Moses and all the prophets and explained how they revealed Him that they understood the true meaning of Scripture. “And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). They later recalled, “Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures?” (Luke 24:32).
The scholars of Jesus’ day carried out heated debates over the correct interpretation of Scripture, but Jesus counselled them to search the Scriptures on the basis that they testified of Him. “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (John 5:39).
3. Genuine Love Rather Than Justification of Selfishness
Since the Scriptures reveal the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, it also follows that the primary theme of the Bible is the love of God and how we are to live out His love in our daily words and actions.
When a clever lawyer tried to involve Jesus in a wordy battle, He began his forensic sparring with the question “Which is the greatest commandment?” The reply that Jesus gave is a profound principle for Biblical interpretation. All the Law and prophets are based on the command to love God with all of our hearts, souls, minds, and strength, and to love our neighbours as ourselves.
Therefore, we must interpret Scripture on the basis of how it teaches us to love God and to love others. Love is the theme of the Bible. All good character qualities are simply practical expressions of genuine love. When the Pharisees used the Law of Moses to justify their harsh and unloving treatment of wives, Jesus reproved them for hardness of heart and took them back to the Creation design of one man and one woman becoming one flesh for the rest of their lives.
The lawyer who tried to engage Jesus in debate then tried to justify himself by asking, “Who is my neighbour?” to which Jesus responded with the parable of the Good Samaritan.
4. Christ’s Commands Over Man’s Theology
Every interpretation of Scripture is based on some foundational structure of reasoning. Jesus provides the structure of truth in the commands that He gave to His disciples during His earthly ministry, and they are the guiding lights for correct Biblical interpretation. They clarify what was written in the Old Testament and are further explained in New Testament teaching. Jesus promises that if we keep His commands before our eyes, He will reveal more of Himself to us. This was the great goal of Paul: “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection” (Philippians 3:10). Jesus further promises, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31–32).
It is customary for a Bible scholar to base his interpretation of a passage on the theological position that he has accepted. The problem with this approach is that no theological system is totally without some human error, because it is not inspired. It is man’s explanation of Biblical truth.
This is not to say that theology is unimportant. Wrong doctrine leads to wrong behaviour. No one was more concerned about false doctrine than the Apostle Paul. He maintained a continual battle against false teaching. However, he did not base sound doctrine on the theological views of his day but on the words of Jesus Christ and that which leads to Christ like living.
He explains this in his epistle to Timothy. “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself” (I Timothy 6:3–5).
5. One Interpretation and Many Applications
The Bible makes it clear that there is only one interpretation of Scripture. However, there can be many applications. It is the Holy Spirit Who guides us not only to the right interpretation of a passage but also to the precise application of Scripture to our daily lives. If our lives are in harmony with the Lord, we can expect the Holy Spirit to illuminate certain passages of Scripture for our personal application. When this happens, it is God giving us a “rhema” of Scripture.
In the New Testament, the Word of God is generally referred to by the Greek word logos. Jesus is identified as the Living Word (logos). However, there are many references that use the Greek word rhema to define the Word of God. A rhema is a precise direction of Scripture for a particular person or circumstance. When Jesus told Peter to cast his net on the other side of the boat, Peter replied, “Master, we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing: nevertheless at thy word [rhema] I will let down the net” (Luke 5:5). Jesus did not tell every one to cast their nets on the other side of the boat—only Peter.
It is on the point of the Holy Spirit applying a passage of Scripture to a decision that critics often rise up and claim that this is not acceptable hermeneutics. Their quarrel is not with believers who know in their spirits that God is directing them by the witness of two or three rhemas, but with the Holy Spirit Who confirms the application of rhemas.
Jesus used rhemas in overcoming Satan’s temptations, and one of the passages He used affirms rhemas. “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word [rhema] that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4).
6. Correct Divisions of Truth Versus Truth Out of Balance
Paul gave Timothy wise instruction in hermeneutics when he wrote, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (II Timothy 2:15).
Scripture is a living, powerful instrument in the hand of God. It functions on what appears to us to be paradoxes. In a similar fashion, the muscles in our bodies are only able to function by opposing tensions.
On the one hand, Scripture presents the Law of God, but then it contrasts this with the grace of God. Scripture teaches the need for justice, but then it counters this with mercy. We are told to cease from our own labour and enter the rest that is in Christ. At the same time, we are commanded to work for the night is coming when no man can work and to labour for the Lord. We have freedom in Christ. However, we are to make ourselves servants to all people.
If we emphasize only one side of God’s Biblical equation, we can certainly support it with verses of Scripture, but we will come out with the wrong answer. Truth out of balance leads to heresy. For example, if we emphasize the “rest” that a believer has and fail to give equal and primary emphasis to the “labour” of a believer, we will view any emphasis on working for the Lord as legalism.
Paul put labour and rest together when he wrote, “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief” (Hebrews 4:9–11). Similarly, there is certainly freedom in Christ. However, if we focus on freedom, we will react to God-ordained authority as being oppressive and cultish.
Proper hermeneutics requires diligent use of all the above factors under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Avoid Scripture Twisting: Eight Basic Rules Of Bible Interpretation
1. Begin with what the passage says, but always ask, “What does the passage mean?”, not what it “says.”
2. Pay attention to the Greek and Hebrew, (For those without language training, an interlinear Bible used in conjunction with a Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words or Expository Dictionary of Bible Words is recommended).
3. Remember the context. Read verses in the context of the whole passage, the chapter and even the book. Finally, keep in mind the larger context of the New Testament or Old Testament.
4. The Bible is progressive revelation. This means that, generally, the New Testament specifically interprets the Old Testament.
5. Always interpret the incidental passage by the systematic teachings of that topic; consider all the passages dealing with the topic, A good topical Bible is a useful aid (e.g. Nave’s Topical Bible).
6. Interpret the unclear passages by the clear ones. A favourite ploy of the cults is to choose a difficult passage and build their unique doctrines on it.
7. Beware of novel interpretations, check various conservative commentaries on the passage. There is very little new under the sun. Many of the heresies of the cults have been dealt with thoroughly. Even though there are many Christian denominations, it is interesting that on the essential doctrines there is solid agreement. Always go beyond what the passage is saying to get at its intended meaning. Cult leaders are expert in isolating passages and imposing their interpretation on it.
8. Come to Scripture prayerfully, submitting to be taught by the Holy Spirit, allowing the Scripture to interpret itself and not be clouded by personal doctrinal presuppositions.
1. Pray! Pray! Pray! The Holy Spirit knows better then you do!
2. Always know what the verse actually says, not what you think you remember it saying
3. Take the verse in literary context, don’t just read what you want to read to prove your point and don’t forget the Bible is a mosaic of different kinds of literature meant to be read different ways.
4. Take the verse in cultural context, just like you saying “it’s raining cats and dogs” is not what you literally meant
5. Remember the Bible is a whole 66 books! Interpret all verses in relation the other 1000’s of verses
6. Check the other translations, The variations are complimentary and show the whole picture
7. The Bible was not originally written in English, go back to the sources
8. Theological presuppositions are bad, scripture determines doctrine, not the other way around
9. Check the Theologians’ opinions, The Ph.D, professor of heart surgery of Harvard is better then your uncle Ted’s heart removal service. Professional opinions matter! (but don’t assume they’re always right)
10. Assume nothing, be ready to learn, don’t give up. Remember, only God knows everything.
561 responses to “Hermeneutics And Exegesis”
@ CH
Chris if you check the comment by Technician @ 3:14pm you will realise that it is not he who is saying that you are Adam Sherman. He was only quoting one “Anon” @1:02pm who was making the claim in that post. Hope this clears things up somewhat. 🙂
Ok Guys…follow slowly. My post was in response to the post by Anon, who stated that AS was indeed CH….follow?….. I then asked the question, how could anyone tell who is who from a post….with me so far?…..went on to explain the need for major technical equipment……hope I haven’t lost you guys…… again I asked Anon how he can be so sure or if someone told him this.
I *hope* this helps you guys.
Like I said, this was priceless…. David, time for subscription.
Mr. Technician says this:
“Oh hell…..AS and CH may not be the same BUT..they have both misread my post, what a laugh today”
And that is so ignorant that it breaks my heart.
Mr Tech: I live in Barbados, I really live here, but whenever I see you begging for money with a dog on a string outside of Bim, I will always give, my brother.
Bless you.
@ Technician
When I am quoting another poster in my comment I have found that it helps clarify things if I first say………..”You said………XYZ” . I then try to make things even clearer by separating my comment from the quote by placing either a line of stars (******)or a line of dashes (———-) between the two. Hope this helps. 🙂
NOTES ON DISPENSATIONS
In the study of Scripture, it is most important to understand that scriptural revelation falls into well defined periods, which are clearly separated stages in the progressive revelation of God which constitute a distinctive stewardship or rule of life.
Recognition of these divisions and their divine purposes constitutes one of the most important factors in facilitating right division and interpretation of the Scriptures, and probably shed more light on the whole message of the Bible than any other aspect of Biblical study. These different divisions or “dispensations” may be observed in successive periods of time.
Scofield defines a “dispensation” as “a period of time during which man is tested in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God.
Three important concepts are implied in this definition;(1) a deposit of divine revelation concerning God’s will, embodying what God requires of man as to his conduct; (2) man’s stewardship of this divine revelation, in which he is responsible to obey it; and (3) a time period, often called “an age”, during which this divine revelation is dominant in the testing of man’s obedience to God.
The dispensations are a progressive and connected revelation of God’s dealings with man, given sometimes to the whole race and at other times to a particular people, Israel.
These different dispensations are not separate ways of salvation. During each of them man is reconciled to God in only one way, i.e. by God’s grace through the work of Christ that was accomplished on the cross and vindicated in His resurrection. Before the cross man was saved in prospect of Christ’s atoning sacrifice, through believing the revelation thus far given him. Since the cross man has been saved by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ in whom revelation and redemption are consummated.
On man’s part the continuing requirement is obedience to the revelation of God. This obedience is a stewardship of faith. Although the divine revelation unfolds progressively, the deposit of truth in the earlier time-periods is not discarded; rather it is cumulative.
Thus conscience (moral responsibility) is an abiding truth in human life (Romans 2:15; 9:1; 2 Corinthians1:12;4:2), although it does not constitute as a dispensation.
Similarly the saved of this present dispensation are “not under law” as a specific test of obedience to divine revelation (Galatians 5:18 cp. Galatians 2:16; 3:11), yet the law remains an integral part of the Holy Scriptures which, to the redeemed, are profitable for “ instruction in righteousness” 2 Timothy 3:16-17; cp. Romans 15:4).
The purpose of each dispensation, then, is to place man under a specific rule of conduct, but such stewardship is not a condition of salvation. In every pass dispensation unregenerate man has failed, and he has failed in this present dispensation and will fail in the future. But salvation has been and will continue to be available to him by God’s grace through faith.”
“The different dispensations are essential if all men are to be proven truly guilty before God. The various testing periods are necessary in order to “stop every mouth.”
Man’s relationship to God is not the same in every age. It has been necessary to bring fallen man into divine testing. This, in part, is God’s purpose in the ages, and the result of the testings is in every case an unquestionable demonstration of the utter failure and sinfulness of man.
In the end, every mouth will be stopped because every assumption of the human heart will be revealed as foolish and wicked by centuries of experience.
Each dispensation, therefore, begins with man being divinely placed in a new position of privilege and responsibility, and each closes with the failure of man resulting in righteous judgments from God.
While there are certain abiding facts, such as the holy character of God, which are of necessity the same in every age, there are varying instructions and responsibilities which are, as to their application, limited to a given period. In the dispensations God has demonstrated every possible means of dealing with man. In every dispensation man fails and only God’s grace is sufficient. God’s purpose is fulfilled in the dispensations to manifest His glory, both in the natural world and human history. Throughout eternity no one can raise a question as to whether God could have given man another chance to attain salvation or holiness on his own ability. A knowledge of the dispensations is accordingly, the key to understanding God’s purpose in history and the unfolding of the Scripture which records God’s dealing with man and His divine revelation concerning Himself.”
Paul shows that all men, without exception, are guilty before God (Rom 1:18-3:19) without any references to or need of dispensations.
Someone in the second or third dispensation can not plead at the judgment as the rich man in Luke 16:27-31 sought to do on the premise that he did not have as much of an opportunity as someone with the added revelation of the fifth or sixth dispensation. This is because in each dispensation man is responsible, and therefore judged on the deposit of revelation available to him at that time.
“In studying the seven dispensations, certain principles are essential to understanding this teaching. Dispensationalism is derived from natural, or literal, interpretation of the Bible. It is impossible to interpret the Bible in its normal, literal sense without realizing that there are different ages and different dispensations.
A second principle is that of progressive revelation, that is, the fact recognized by nearly all students of Scripture, that revelation is given by stages.
Third, all expositors of the Bible will need to recognize that later revelation to some extent supersedes earlier revelation with a resulting change in rules of life in which earlier requirements may be changed or withdrawn and new requirements added. For instance, while God commanded Moses to kill a man for gathering sticks on Saturday (Numbers 15:32-36), no one would apply this command today because we live in a different dispensation.”
Most, not all, dispensationalists generally hold to the seven dispensations outlined below:
“1. Dispensation of innocence-Age of Liberty. This begins at Genesis 1:26,27 and ends at Genesis 3:6.
2. Dispensation of conscience-Age of Human Determination. This begins at Genesis 3:7 and ends at Genesis 8:19.
3. Dispensation of human government-Covenant With Noah. This begins at Genesis 8:20 and ends at Genesis 11:9.
4. Dispensation of promise- Covenant With Abraham. This begins at Genesis 11:10 and ends at Exodus 19:3.
5. Dispensation of law (The Nation of Israel). This begins at Exodus 19:4 and ends at Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost.
In one sense the dispensation of the law ended at the cross (Romans 10:4, 2 Corinthians 3:11-14; Galatians 3: 19, 25). But in another sense it was not concluded until the day of Pentecost, when the dispensation of Grace began.
Although the law ended as a specific rule of life, it continues to be a revelation of the righteousness of God and can be studied with profit by Christians in determining the holy character of God.
The moral principles underlying the law continue, since God does not change; but believers today are not obliged today to keep the details of the law, as the dispensation has changed and the rule of life given Israel is not the rule of life for the church. Although many applications of the law may be made, a strict interpretation relates the Mosaic law to Israel only.
6. Dispensation of grace (The Church): This begins at Acts 2 and ends at the Rapture of the Church. The dispensation of grace was directed to the church alone.
Under grace, however, failure also is evident as grace has produced neither worldwide acceptance of Christ nor a triumphant church.
The dispensation of grace ends with the rapture of the church, which will be followed by the judgment of the professing church (Revelation 17:16). The age of grace is a different dispensation in that it concerns the church comprising Jewish and Gentile believers.
By contrast, the law of Israel was for Israel only, human government was for the entire world, and conscience extends to all people.
In the present dispensation, the Mosaic law is completely canceled as to its immediate application, but continues to testify to the holiness of God and provides many spiritual lessons by application.
Although all dispensations contain a gracious element, the dispensation of grace is the supreme manifestation both in the fullness of salvation received and in the rule of life.”
7.To the above C I Scofield adds the Dispensation of the Kingdom (Revelation 20:4). “This is the last of the ordered ages which condition human life on the earth. It is the kingdom covenanted to David (2 Samuel 7:8-17) [when] David’s greater Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, will rule over the earth as King of kings and Lord of lords for 1000 years.”
In this classification of dispensations the Dispensation of the Kingdom or the Millennium is the only future dispensation.
From the foregoing, it is obvious that the following dispensations can be classified as past;
The Dispensation of innocence/Age of Liberty, which ended at the fall of man, and resulted in man’s expulsion from the Garden inter alia,
the Dispensation of conscience/Age of Human Determination, which ended at the judgment of the flood,
the Dispensation of human government, which ended at the judgment of the confusion of tongues occasioned by the folly at Babel,
the Dispensation of promise/ Covenant with Abraham, which ended with the giving of the law at Sinai (Exodus 19:3), when the Dispensation of law was ushered in. This dispensation began at Exodus 19:4 and ended at Acts 2 on the Day of Pentecost.
As stated above we are still regulated by our consciences to some extent (if they are not seared), and by Human Government (Titus 3:1; Romans 13:1-7), and we are blessed especially by the promise of the Covenant with Abraham which results from Christ being Abraham’s seed.
Whereas the Dispensation of law is passed, the majority of the world’s civilizations are ruled by
civil laws, which are based largely on those set out in the Mosaic Covenant. Man has thereby conceded that there are no better laws than those prescribed by God-even though he chooses to disobey them.
The current or present dispensation is the Dispensation of grace or the Church Age which is scheduled to end at the Rapture of the Church- the next major event on God’s prophetic calendar.
The dispensations involved in the Genesis portion of the Bible are those of innocence, conscience, human government, and promise.
Amusing…
Every time I “push the envelope”, I’m logged out of BU.
But now, (subject to correction) I cannot find a “log-in” link under the “new” BU.
WTF?
@ Hood…
Man stop making excuses for them man, how come you understood it enough to correct CH?
My guess is that you READ it, right?
This is a blog, quick to the point and fast. You really think after terminating hundreds of points per day, that I have time to type like Dictionary?
I am in awe at how people type so much..me, I picking all now.
@ AS..
You may ‘live’ in Bim but I am a born and bred Bajan….pick sense from nonsense!
I’m not sure who Adrian Sherman is.was/mat be
bit i’m sure he is a wg=hite guy
how do we defeat him?
bu using BIf Woerds
@ Techie
Peace my bro, not making excuses for anyone. Just trying to clarify things a bit.
Zoe // March 14, 2010 at 9:11 PM
More ‘demonic’ led ‘parasites, one Pat et al, are crawling all over the crab-barrel of DARKENED ignorance , from whence their spirtual ‘filth’ emanate.
******************************************************
Mr. Zoe, thank god, this parasite is not feeding off of you. It would end up, not only starved but, stupid and illiterate, excuse me, according to Jack Bowman alias Adam Sherman, subliterate.
Have a good day.
@ Pat
You got me here laughing my head off at your candid response to “Mr” Zoe.
I think your response fits him to a “T”. 🙂
The more I see the comments of the BUT, the more I conclude that they are just a trio of “bogey” men sent here to distract & disrupt the even flow of topics raised here on BU.
@Bush Tea
On another topic Pat…..any interest in bush baths? it should be a rejuvenating, uplifting experience……. LOL Zoe like he frighten ac…..and after reading ‘True Bajan’ talking about his ‘exploits’ Bush Tea could as well try for at least one chick….especially one that could cook like you..
*****************************************
Ha, ha, ha. Mate, I believe in bush baths both kinds. Where have you been the last two months when I could not raise my hand to scrub my back? You could have saved me some $ which I left at the physiotherapist and some bigger $s at the masseuse!
True story. I have a Guyanese girlfriend who I was afraid to walk with, or take any where in my car. This girl, crossing the street, was knocked down on the green walk sign by a car; out shopping at Zellers, an entire display fell on her feet; getting off the bus, the driver took off before she was on the ground and she fell and broke her arm; she came home one day and found her basement flooded with heating oil (this after she had converted from oil heat to natural gas some several years before); then once when the power was off she lit candles and went into the bath to get ready for work to be alerted that there was a fire (the wind blew curtains into the candle flame). She ran outside stark naked and caught pneumonia and was hospitalized. After this, I told her to go see her priest and get a blessing and some ‘holy water’. She told me she had already done that after the second accident. A Guyanese male friend told me to tell her to get a bush bath. Well, Mr. Bush Tea, she went to Guyana, had her bush bath and came back. This was about twelve years ago. To-date there has been no accidents nor occurrences whatsoever. So, I guess these bush baths do work. Of course our friend Zoe will say its the devil’s work. I, however, will say it is high science!
LOL Pat,
Zoe thinks that anything that he cannot find in one of his church books is the devil’s work. Anyway the bush bath that I have in mind will be the bushman’s handiwork…. ha ha
@Bush Tea
Yuh know back in dem bibilical times dey was no such ting as soap. So guess dem people had lots of bush bath.
I h ave been asking you to defend the slander levied at you about the bath bath ,Not good!
Doc GP asked to upload this presentation (Powerpoint required)
@Anonymous
You know this is a religious blog so why do you click and enter? Let those who want to discuss religion do it and you feel free to comment on the other blogs. What is so hard about that to do? Would like to know, really!
The Holy Spirit in the Life of the Church.
Not only is the work of the Holy Spirit seen in the individual justified believer, but He is also seen in the collective, True Church, the Body of Christ. The coming of the Holy Spirit to form the Church, the many-membered Body of Christ, was foreshadowed in Israel under the Feast of Pentecost, even as the work of Christ was foreshadowed under the Feast of Passover [Exodus 12; Leviticus 23; Acts 2: 1-4]. The Holy Spirit of the Triune Godhead, is the One who came to earth to build the Church that the Lord Jesus Christ said He would build [Matt 16: 16-20] . The Holy Spirit could not be given UNTIL Jesus Christ was *glorified* after His death, burial, resurrection and ascension [John 7: 38-39).
It is the *indwelling* work of the Holy Spirit that is the difference between the experience of Old and New Testament Saints. It IS the distinguishing feature of New Covenant times. This is seen in the baptismal sign which was given to John the Baptist, concerning the Messiah. John 1:33 says “Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, the same is HE (Jesus Christ) which baptizeth with the Holy Spirit.” This qualified Jesus to be the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit.
In the Old Testament the Holy Spirit descended on special ones, equipping and filling them but, not remaing or indwelling them continually. Jesus promised His disciples that the Holy Spirit would come and *dwell* with them and in them and that, as the Comforter, He would abide with them forever ( John 14: 16-17).
The major features of the Holy Spirit’s work in the Church includes the following:
1. The Holy Spirit formed the Church on the Day of
Pentecost into a corporate structure, the Body of
Christ. He baptized the living members into this
spiritual body, Pentecost is called the birthday of
the Church (Acts 2: 1-4; 1 Cor 12: 12-27; Eph 1:22-
23).
2. The Holy Spirit formed the Church to be the new and
living temple of God, setting justified believers into
their places as living stones in the New Covenant
temple ( 1 Cor 3:16; 6:16; Eph 2:20-22).
3. The Holy Spirit brings anointing, illumination and
direction to the Church as the New Covenant Priestly
Body (11 Cor 1:21; Psa 133: 1-2; 1 John 2:20; Eph
1:17-18; Acts 10;38 1 Cor 12: 12-13).
4. The Holy Spirit brings gifts and graces to the
members of the Church (1 cor 12: 4-11; 28: 31;
Romans 12: 6-8; Gal 5:22-23). The gifts of the Holy
Spirit are a demonstration in the Church of the
Spirit’s Omnipotence, Omniscience and
Omnipresence. The fruit of the Spirit is the evidence
of the nature and character of the Holy spirit in the
members of the Body of Christ.
5. The Holy Spirit is the One of direction and
government in the Church. The Lord Jesus Christ
IS the Head of the Church in heaven and He directs
His affairs in His Body, the Church by means of the
Holy Spirit. It is the Holy spirit who calls, quickens,
energizes and equips the various ministries in the
Church, and every member of the Body of Christ
according to their particular place ( Acts 13: 1-3; 15:
28; 20:28; 1 Cor 12: 8-11; Eph 4: 8-12; 1 Peter 1:12;
1 Cor 2: 1-5; Acts 1:8)
Thus, as Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church, was under total control of the Holy Spirit, and the Spirit was able to flow freely in perfect and unhindered operation, so this is to be manifested in the Church as the visible and mystical Body of Christ in the earth.
The Holy Spirit in the World.
The work of the Holy Spirit is summarized clearly in John 16: 9-11. The Holy spirit has come with a three-fold ministry in relation to the world; to REPROVE the world of Sin, Righteousness, and Judgment.
1. Of SIN: Because they believe not on Christ. The
damnable Sin IS that of unbelief. It IS the ROOT sin
of all others. This area of reproof or conviction
especially deals with the SIN of man.
2. OF Righteousness: Because Jesus Christ has gone
to the Father, and at present we do not see Him. This
area of conviction involves the Righteousness of
Christ, as the Saviour of men.
3. Of Judgment: Because the prince of the world, Satan,
was judged at Calvary. This area of conviction
involves the judgment of Satan and his hosts and
their defeat at Calvary.
The work of the Holy Spirit in relation to the unconverted, is to convince, convict and convert.
An example of this convicting work is seen in Paul’s ministry before Felix, when Felix trembled as Paul reasoned with him of “righteousness, temperance and judgment to come” (Acts 1: 5-8; 24: 25; 2:37-42; 4:4; 7:51; Genesis 6: 3)
(Foundations of Christian Doctrine, pp. 79, 80) emphasis added.
There is no rational human explanation, of the birth of the Church on the Day of Pentecost; its amazing growth during the Apostolic era, Circa 35-100 A,D, under severe persecution and martyrdom, apart from the supernatural *indwelling* and empowerment of the Holy Spirit of Almighty God, and all of its subsequent growth and expansion throughout the Roman Empire, with more vile, inhuman torturing, of those who KNEW the Resurrected and Ascended Lord, Jesus Christ, who PROMISED them, the Holy Spirit, as their Comforter, guide, teacher, who ALONE was able to take them through the vilest rejection and hatred for their Saviour and Lord, all through the Post Apostolic era, the Spanish Inquisition of the Papacy, where the most dasterdly forms of Torture recorded in history, were imposed by the tyrranical Roman Catholic Institution, and many were burt alive, on the stakes, with eyewitness accounts of unbelieavable ‘peace’ on their faces, while the FIRE rose to their bosoms, ONLY, the indwelling presence of the *Comforter* that Jesus promised them, the Holy Spirit, could explain such miraculous happenings.
And, today, thousnds upon thousands of Justified Christians around various countries of the World, Sudan is one of them, where in recent times, Hundreds of thousands of Black brothers and Sisters, In Christ, Children and babies included, have been SLAUGHTERED by Black, Islamist, Jihadist Muslims, and it IS still going on as I write.
But, while the torture and killing of Christians continue around the world, the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, His True Body, also continues to grow rapidly, throughout the nations of the world, and HE is building His Church, as He said He would, with the HOLY SPIRIT, guiding, leading, teaching, and Comforting ALL whom He Indwells, and HE will remain with us, UNTIL, the End of the Age, when the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords, JESUS CHRIST, makes His Glorious Second Coming a LIVING reality, as ALL eyes will see Him as He descends on earth, in Majesty and Glory, that cannot be described…woe to those who have scoffed and mocked at Him…but…it will too late!
SATAN, the arch-deceiver and father of ALL ‘lies’ and spiritual deception, is cleverly WICKED, he will ease up on afflicting many with , i.e., accidents, fires, you name it….if one will just fall for his numerous demonic ‘tricks’ such as a ‘Bush Bath’ in Guyana…riff with Obeah…Burhnum officially sanctioined Obeah in Guyana…look at the mess that country is in, Obeah, Islam, Hinduism..no wonder!
When one innocently goes this path, ‘Bush Bath’ whose origins are from ‘Witchcraft’ be it the Cuban version, Santeria, or the Trini’ version, Shango, or the Hatian version, Vodoo, or maybe the Bajan version, Obeah, ya still dealing with the DEVIL, as once he gets a ‘foot’ in your soul/mind, life, which he WANTS, all appears to be going just fine, no more accidents, fires, etc, BUT, he has a foothold on your life.
The Devil has deceived so many with this nonsense, many think they are doing well… go and have the Bush Bath, you’ll probably feel good after it….but you have opened up your soul/mind and body to deceiving Demons, what and end it will be for you…and BTW, no priest with some so-called holy water, another LIE from the Catholics, six a one and half dozen of the other..look what happen to Haiti, practicing Vodoo daily, then the Catholic Mass, more demonic subterfuge!
David
What did I do?!!! I thought my last post at 11:55 was polite and was related to the topic. GP gave a polite reply which sought to buttress his views on Bible study methods. This is the first time I’ve posted on this blog since then.
Maybe you meant the Sherman guy? I ain’t him.
@Anonymous
This is the comment!
@GP
Having some computer problems, using a backup which unfortunately needs to be updates.
Will convert as soon as BU gets a grip.
@Anonymous
This is the comment!
@GP
Having some computer problems, using a backup which unfortunately needs to be updates.
Will convert as soon as BU gets a grip.
That was Anon(2)!!! Not this “Anonymous”! I never get into blog moderating business.
@ Zoe
You like you really think that the devil is a idiot. You really think that Satan ain’t got nothing better to do than look for people dabbling in Obeah etc – people who he already own?
Satan is MUCH more active around people like you who think that they are God’s chosen. Jesus said that many shall come IN HIS NAME (Christians) – confirming that he is indeed the son of God – and they shall deceive many….
How can one tell those who Satan are controlling??? not by bible talk….
Check their hateful attitudes – cursing and condemning others; combative and arrogant ….. the kind of fruit that betray their pedigree.
Bush Tea real worried ’bout you…..
@ ac
Girl What defend whatself about what bush bath what??!!
You serious?!! Because Zoe bring up that foolish talk? The truth is that I really thought that a bush bath was a medicinal thing until I learned of the other implications… The bush bath that I was offering you was a normal everyday bath – only it would have been administered by the BUSH man…..
..but since you are scared of Zoe I have been trying a ‘lil thing with Pat….
Trust me, even if the bush man were to choose to have a real bush bath I would have no fear of any occultist repercussions. The kind of ‘arsenal’ that accompanies BT renders that possibility laughable….
….if only Zoe really knew about that Holy Spirit about which he continues to copy and paste misguided conjecture……
Isn’t a Bush Bath about having a bath using herbs in the water?
Onlookers
Mr Sherman’s reply above — sadly — can be summed up:
In short, Mr Sherman is not here to engage a serious discussion, he is here to vent his selectively hyperskeptical talking points, all the while dripping with closed mindedness and contempt for the intelligence of those who differ with him. (as he demonstrated in his original post and as he took occasion of my correction to double down on in his follow-up comments. Want of basic Caribbean broughtupcy and civility are patent.)
Secondly, let us not lose a key point: you can be sure that Mr Sherman’s patent unwillingness to acknowledge that there are serious discussions linked for him to address on the merits means that he does not have a credible response on said merits, so he prefers to resort to the rhetoric of dismissive contempt.
Not to mention, he is unwilling to engage the point of the already cited — not merely linked (his previous excuse for ignoring) — the list of twelve minimal facts surrounding the incidents described in the gospels as the Passion of Jesus. [Notice, how he glides over these in a convenient silence, clearly hoping we would miss that ducked bouncer, even as he distracts us with foolish words on how most people don’t follow links. Mr Sherman is not most people, he is plainly a well educated person with responsibility to address matters of serious import on their merits, not with rhetorical games.]
Well, we do not need to duck, bob and dance distractively.
For, after two and more centuries of debates and sharp skeptical attacks, the majority to overwhelming majority of not just conservative scholars but also the skeptical ones accept that the following are credible, well-warranted historical facts, that demand a proper inference to best explanation:
Now, too, the summary of the C1 church’s official testimony we find in the AD 55 primary source document — i.e. 25 years after the event, and credibly based on testimony and meetings in the mid 30’s — commonly seen in translation as 1 Cor 15:1 – 11 easily explains the facts.
But, NONE of the various skeptical theories advanced in recent centuries can effectively engage even a significant subset of them. In short, we have a serious case of an inference to best explanation that cuts clean across skeptical dismissive arguments and exposes them as hollow and utterly biased, failing to seriously engage the full range of credible facts.
And, Mr Sherman falls into precisely the same trap above.
Sad.
Plainly, he has not bothered to see that what I did with the 101 level summary on the key warranting case for the Christian faith [and for the wider Judaeo-Christian worldview] is to put in a handy one-click away location a cluster of evidence from credible sources and a summary level discussion of its best explanation on principles of warranting matters of fact in the experienced world.
And, beyond that when I gave specific references to the discussion on the historicity of Lk-Ac [which provides teh historical backbone for our knowledge of the history of the founding era oft eh Christian church and which has been shown to be a very credible history indeed, e.g. cf the well-known Sherwin-White’s work as a historian], I did so to expose Mr Sherman to two presentations of the state of serious scholarship on the matter. Mr Sherman, almost predictably, derided and dismissed what he cannot bother to examine on basic, courtroom-tested principles of factual investigation. (And, onlookers, FYI — Mr Sherman will doubtless take the excuse that hardly anyone uses links to avoid having to actually work through what he would find it very hard to find in a nutshell elsewhere — the just linked — also from my online note — is to the cluster of principles summarised by a key founder of the modern Anglophone jurisprudential theory of evidence, Simon Greenleaf, also a key founder of Harvard Law School. His book on Evidence is still on sale for US$300+.)
_______________
So, we know that Mr Sherman’s dismissal of the key NT documents as fictional reflects more of his biases than it does the balance of the case on the merits.
We also know that despite being a highly educated person capable of and — as he has intervened publicly on one side of the matter — responsible to address such matters fairly on the merits, he has chosen to duck, dance and bob, putting up an ink-cloud of selectively hyperskeptical rhetoric and personalities, rather than seriously play the bowling.
Next, we will turn to his attempts to dismiss the issue that his evident evolutionary materialism-rooted selective hyperskepticism faces serious worldview challenges as an alternative view of the world. So serious in fact, that this view — never mind how it has come to ideologically dominate the institutions of science, the academy and major media — is self-refuting, thus stumbles and breaks its own neck coming out the starting gates. (NB: Whether or not he is personally such an evolutionary materialist, he needs to know that his is the soil in which the attitudes and arguments he is using have grown)
D
Onlookers:
Part 2.
First, it is evident to all that evolutionary materialism is the ideologically dominant view in the world of institutional science and the academy, being popularised therefrom by the various relevant media. It is often presented as “science,” but is in fact a worldview with a priori assumptions imposed on science, as Harvard Agassiz professor Lewontin frankly admitted in his well known 1997 NYRB article, “Billions and Billions of Demons”:
That this is no idiosyncratic personal view can be seen from another remark in the same article: “To Sagan [whose final book was being reviewed], as to all but a few other scientists, it is self-evident [a clue that this is built in at the level of assumptions! And of course if the matter was really “self-evident,” it would precisely not be “counter-intuitive”] that the practices of science provide the surest method of putting us in contact with physical reality.” [And of course, to the a priori materialist, “physical reality” is the only ultimate reality.]
In recent years, major scientific institutions such as the US National Academy of Sciences, science education associations like the US National Science teacher’s Association, the media and even the court rooms [and here Judge Jones simply copied out post-trial ACLU submissions on the relevant topics, as driven by the narrative of Atheist and philosopher Barbara Forrest et al; blatant errors of fact and reasoning and all] have tried to enforce this new orthodoxy, by fiat of the new Magisterium in lab coats.
However, we cut closer to the heart of the problem when we reflect on Nobel Prize winner Sir Francis Crick’s utterly and inadvertently revealing 1994 The Astonishing Hypothesis:
Nope, it is more properly called, utterly and irretrievably self-contradictory and so self-refuting.
For, Philip Johnson has issued the apt rejoinder that Sir Francis should have been therefore willing to preface his works thusly: “I, Francis Crick, my opinions and my science, and even the thoughts expressed in this book, consist of nothing more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.” Johnson then acidly commented: “[t]he plausibility of materialistic determinism requires that an implicit exception be made for the theorist.” [Reason in the Balance, 1995.]
That is, Johnson (an expert on the logic of evidence based argument in the courtroom) is arguing that IF self-evident “fact no 1” — that we are conscious, mental creatures who at least some of the time have freedom to think, intend, decide, speak, act and even write based on the logic and evidence of the situation — is false, THEN the science and rationality are dead. So, evolutionary materialism (never mind the various rhetorical denials we will doubtless shortly hear) ends up in reductionism to physicalism and control of mental processes by forces of chance and necessity that trace to anything but what is needed: free inference on the strength of fact and logical grounds and consequences. This includes the thoughts of materialist thinkers too, so Crick and other evolutionary materialists are here hoist on their own petard as the charge they thought would detonate and destroy the mindset that intuitively accepts the importance of the human spirit and mind, blows up early and throws them out of the gunpowder-charged mine they were digging.
But that is not all, as it has been known since 360 BC that evolutionary materialism embeds destructive amorality. But, it is wise to cite Cornell U historian of science William Provine at the 2nd annual Darwin Week celebrations at UTenn in 1998 on this first, as a hostile witness making an inadvertently damaging admission of ideological agenda and its consequences:
[ . . . .]
Of course, as a bonus, Provine backs up Crick, showing just how firmly the self-referential absurdity is built in once we ask: can evo mat credibly account for mind?, the answer is plain: no, it ends up fatally undermining the whole world of thought, for if we cannot choose to listen to facts and choose to follow logical consequences — because we have no real freedom of choice, however we may feel we have freely chosen — we cannot truly think.
But, we must zoom in on his third consequence of evo mat: “no ultimate foundation for ethics exists.” AMORALITY, in one word.
This is not news, to those who have been following idea roots.
For in Plato’s The Laws, Bk X, 360 BC, we may read a devastating expose of what this philosophical imposition means and what it portends — based on the destructive career of Alcibiades and others of like ilk in Athens at the time of the Peloponnesian war and its aftermath.
Here, Plato speaks in the voice of the Athenian Stranger:
And of course, such destructive amorality and might makes right, ends justify means Machiavellian philosophies and ideological agendas have had devastating consequences again and again across the past 2,300 + years. Predictably, if we let this same self-refuting, amoral agenda run rampant across our region, it will have the same, ever so often repeated result: chaos, tyranny at the hands of the cynically manipulative, oppression, destruction.
Evolutionary materialism is self-refuting, an ideological biasing a priori imposition on scientific studies of origins, and is an amoral, destructive ideology that we would do well to correct and reject in our region
________________
And of course, we cannot but observe a characteristic attitude held by adherents of such professed wisdom that as Rom 1 points out is in the end only mind-endarkened conscience-benumbed folly: the all to patently familiar assumption of intellectual superiority and dismissive contempt to those who do not go along with the programme.
Sorry, Mr Sherman, this agenda has been exposed for 2,300 years and the most telling expose is in the commonest book in the Caribbean, in the 57 AD Rom 1:18 – 32.
We are not buying that stale and harmful bill of goods.
G’day
D
PS: Let’s predict. We will probably shortly hear a rhetorical dismissal on the claim that the above is “long and boring, stylistically dull, etc, etc.” This reveals the catch-22 game: if you put a discussion at responsible length and substantiation in the thread you are putting up endless verbiage. If you link, well we won’t follow useless links to tendentious arguments. In short, we are seeing excuses for closed mindedness.
PPS: Back on topics closer to the focus of the thread, we see that BT is plainly refusing to address the substantial, largely Biblical challenges to his earlier assertions on the meaning of the scriptures, instead hoping to get away with beating up rhetorically on Zoe. We can chalk that down as an implicit admission that he does not have a credible case on the merits, but finds it convenient to not acknowledge this and deal with it squarely.
PPPS: A good start-point for onward discussion of the focal topic for the thread is the PPT presentation on dispensationalism David has put up for GP. I find my self in partial agreement, as I believe that there has been a different focus on his God deals with us, based on the light we have and the circumstances we face, including the covenant we are under — national and spiritual. (For instance as a Jamaican, I am under the covenant expressed in the Jamaican national Anthem — best in the world in my opinion — and symbols.) But, I believe in the principle that this side of the fall, all who are saved are saved by repentant faith in God as we have light. Cf here Rom 2:5 – 9 to see where I am going on that. And, I cannot find it in me to accept any species of replacement theology where the church replaces the calling and covenantal, prophetic relationship with God held by Israel — and from Gal 3:13 ff, by any people who embrace God in faith through the seed of Abraham and reform their culture wholeheartedly based on the voice of the promised Spirit as he illuminates the Word and changes hearts and lives. Similarly, any civilization that willfully forgets God and serves sin self and substitutes for the true God — even “science, falsely so called” — will walk a path of utter ruin through the march of sinful, arrogant folly in the name of professed wisdom that is in reality just en-darkenment in the name of enlightenment. (And Mr Sherman et al, that word choice is very very deliberate in light of say Matt 6:22 – 23 and Eph 4:17 – 24.)
David: I see that the closing part of my comment on evolutionary materialism is awaiting moderation; why I know not. Strange are the ways of Akismet. D
Thanksgiving to God for His Enduring Mercy
To Him who struck down great kings,
For His mercy endures forever;
And slew famous kings,
For His mercy endures forever—
Anon // March 7, 2010 at 11:57 AM – I am not sure why Anonymous cannot ask the question he asked. According to Georgie – he teaches Doctors, lawyers, etc,etc. To a Teacher – there is no foolish question. Why does Georgie need you to speak for him and withhold an answer from Anonymous? Who made you a filter? Stuuupppsee
David, thanks.D
Maggie:
Sadly, in a context where there is a lot of hostility coming from demonstrably closed-minded anti-Christian advocates (who are invading a thread that is on a topic they ought rather to be students on!) there are LOADED and distractive questions meant to distract rather than advance discussion..
Until such advocates acknowledge say the force of the remarks here, March 9 above — a week ago today! — on what hermeneutics and exegesis are about as glorified and systematised common sense principles and techniques of accurate reading, they have nothing positive to contribute to the discussion, and that is why it is a fair response to ignore them after a certain point.
D
Georgie Porgie you are on my nerves. (Re:>>Georgie Porgie // March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM “What I find very amusing is that a lot of the teaching on this thread is basic basic stuff which I learned in Sunday school in the late 60’s and early 70’s before I left Barbados to go the Jamaica to study at age 22.”)
I found your information on the Bible extremely interesting as I did Zoe’s; however you talk like a pompous ass. Why don’t you do a regular blog and then another one for the arrogant and pompous. We GET it – you are educated. You are just the type of teacher who turns off people from learning. You are so full of yourself that the importance of your message (whether it is Biblical teaching or otherwise) becomes blurred and lost – overshadowed by the personality. Are you teaching or merely showing off?
PS: Those wishing to find a basis for more balanced discussion on the nature of “race” may want to start here, with a Sci museum exhibition, which you can use to help calibrate the tone and substance of this Wiki 101 level briefing on the concept and issues relating to “race.” (Note, the Wiki article has in it something like 104 specific references adn a bibliography of about 80 further pieces of serious reading; comparing favourably with many a serious scientific research paper or even a thesis; in short, Hopi’s namecalling dismissal is empty-headed — though of course I have always advocated caution in using Wiki or any other generic reference; much less technical or popular level articles and books.) From these, you can then begin to deal with the euro-vcentric vs afrocentric myths issues on the racial roots of Ancient Egyptians. For me, the issue is a non-starter, as it is plain that the basis of capacity, dignity and intelligence is our Creation in the image of God, which — as studies showing there is such a thing as a mitochondrial Eve support — makes us all brothers and sisters and cousins. [As a matter of fact, I gather there is probably more raw genetic diversity in your average troop of Baboons than in the human race.)
Pardon, accidental cross threading!
@Zoe
“SATAN, the arch-deceiver and father of ALL ‘lies’ and spiritual deception, is cleverly WICKED…”
That is what you have been doing here on BU from inception. Are you then Satan?
@BT
“How can one tell those who Satan are controlling??? not by bible talk…. Check their hateful attitudes – cursing and condemning others; combative and arrogant ….. the kind of fruit that betray their pedigree.”
Man I love that. I nominating you for a Nobel Prize for that statement alone.
Well David, it seems Satan is at work. I am not getting that powerpoint.
Are we aware that the soap we bath with made from bush? This is so silly. Zoe building superstition in people’s mind? The oil that you make the soap with come from bush and the odour is a bush odour. A lot of the cream that you cream your skin with made from bush. Nothing better for the skin than aloes and others like “flat hand plimpler”.
So what is the difference with using the bush directly and making it as soap. You think there is some magic in soap that kills all the evils of the bush? That is so much nonsense as to be absurd. So only the white man soap we must bathe with?
Sounds like you got some shares in lifeboy or pamolive or you working for them. You come here to deter people from bathing with the exact thing they making the soap from. You protecting the soap market. Satan at work in the name of Christ.
“David: I see that the closing part of my comment on evolutionary materialism is awaiting moderation; why I know not. Strange are the ways of Akismet. D”
Some people when they can’t get what they want will stoop to calling people names.
@Dic
“Sadly, in a context where there is a lot of hostility coming from demonstrably closed-minded anti-Christian advocates…”
Like you? Because you are certainly ant-Christian, you have so little faith if any at all.
Can I get a (pushy Jehovah’s) Witness?[*]
Find out more
* Trinity
* End Times and millennialism
[*] disclaimer = I am no JW
@ maggie
“You are so full of yourself that the importance of your message (whether it is Biblical teaching or otherwise) becomes blurred and lost – overshadowed by the personality. Are you teaching or merely showing off?”
Not just well said, it is a perfect analysis. When it comes to the spiritual matters, Georgie is more like the nurse than the doctor. It is the difference between knowing how to do something and why you are doing it.
“on what hermeneutics and exegesis are about as glorified and systematised common sense principles and techniques of accurate reading, they have nothing positive to contribute to the discussion, and that is why it is a fair response to ignore them after a certain point.”
The ignored seek to ignore. LOL!
@ David, “Isn’t a Bush Bath about having a bath using herbs in the water?”
No doubt, that some of our God given natural herbs, may very well be good for such intent. BUT, invariably, as Satan always does, the Occultists, mediums, spiritists, et al have corrupted such, masquarding under this ‘Bush Bath’ thing, all the while engaging in deceptive Occultic ritual under the guise of a herbal Bush Bath!
Right here in B’dos, a certain well know Herbalist, is at heart a devout ‘Spiritualist’ which is severly condemned by Almighty God in His Word; this person conducts an advertised business entity, premised on ‘Herbal’ treatments, some of which necessitates their ‘touching’ you, rubbing your skin and so on; now, the very herb in itself might be good, BUT, when this is applied, by the hands of an Occultist, with their demon spirits, which by the way, they DO NOT recognize nor see as Demons, NO, NO NO….they call them spirit ‘guides’ the person who innocently went for this treatment, and it might very well improve their ailment to some extent, BUT, they now have some ‘Demon’ spirits with them!
This is NO joke!
BTW, the so-called ‘Arsenal’ that BT says he has, is nothing but a bunch of Occultic, demon oriented deception, the Holy Spirit IS so far from him, that when he finally falls, it is going to be devastating for him…just a matter of time….waite and see!
@Zoe
“No doubt, that some of our God given natural herbs, may very well be good for such intent. BUT, invariably, as Satan always does, the Occultists, mediums, spiritists, et al have corrupted such, masquarding under this ‘Bush Bath’ thing, all the while engaging in deceptive Occultic ritual under the guise of a herbal Bush Bath!”
Who bets would know but a masquerader himself. What masquerade what? That is pure foolishness you saying, preying on the fears of innocent people. You won’t get me or many here on BU with that ignorance. So who will you get with that? What occultic ritual what? What is so occult about a bush bath. If ever there was stupidness spewed on BU it is this foolishness by you.
So you can’t get the same occultic ritual with soap that have in the same herbs? Steupseeeeee.
@Zoe
“Right here in B’dos, a certain well know Herbalist, is at heart a devout ‘Spiritualist’ which is severly condemned by Almighty God in His Word…”
And besides you, who else know that this herbalist is condemned by god. You got that in a dream? The Holy Spirit condemn “Spirituality”? What garbage!
Onlookers:
I see ROK — who by his own confession, padlocked his mind on these matters 30 years ago — is coming in to try to cast confusing clouds of digital ink by playing at turnabout false, slanderous accusation.
Please note that he has been spreading the slander that Bible-believing Christians worship a blond haired blue eyed white man’s idol and refuses to acknowledge correction, even on the true balance of sunday school type art. A slander that led one of like ilk, Hopi, to unrepentantly call for arson against churches.
Sadly revealing.
FYI
D
David: Sorry on formatting error. D