Some comments to help you understand what I don't understand:
1. What are you referring to with the phrase "authoritative appeal"? I have no idea.
2. From my perspective, for the most part, whatever was true then holds true today, so I don't understand your assumption that something does not hold true today.
3. I don't understand the comment that Paul believed that we were perfected by "another." And why would this be an unusual conclusion?
4. I don't understand why you say that the Bible cannot be understood "by others than those infilled."
5. I don't understand why you would think that your question was without merit just because I pointed out how you had overstated the case. I thought your questions were very good, and I have thought long and hard on these very same questions years ago.
6. I disagree with how you characterize the idea that there were not "theologians" who referred to texts the way modern ministers do. Modern ministers today correspond more closely with the "scribes and Pharisees" of Jesus' day. They did study the texts in this way and wrote about them, but their writings were never canonized just as modern ministers do not have their writings canonized.
7. The phrase, "is there more to a conclusive answer" is confusing somewhat to me. However, I assume that perhaps you are asking if there is more to it. Yes, there is. I not only know in part, but I speak in part too. Never expect to find my entire viewpoint about a subject in any post. There is just too much in my mind to write down in any one sitting, and most issues are complex with multiple factors to consider. I never offer the full answer, and I like the idea of synergism in discussions, the concept that when I share a little and others share a little, in the end we all come to know the answers much better than we ever did before.
8. Why the ranker over misapplying Scripture? Because our path of knowing the Living Word is subjective, and we need an objective element to help keep us within that narrow path. Scripture is what God has chosen to help us sort out false subjective evidence from true. I think it should be basic Christian understanding that part of our responsibility to each other as fellow believers is to challenge and provoke one another to love, using Scriptures as the baseline for how we speak. Did not even Paul often argue, "as it is written..." Did not Jesus argue in the same way? Then so should we.
9. Bonhoeffer -- just to let you know, I am about as impressed with Bonhoeffer as I am with Joseph Smith. Bonhoeffer taught lying and deception by a student in the classroom as a valid, moral position. He vascillated on his position of pacifism and found himself choosing to plan the assassination of Hitler (not understanding Romans 13 and the concept of how God raises up and tears down). He did not regard that even David would not raise his hand against Saul. Martyred? His assassination plot was foiled, and he was tried, found guilty, and then hung by his enemies for attempting to murder their ruler. That is hardly giving his life for Christ. I'm sure the Mormons believe that Joseph Smith gave his life for Christ too, but I don't buy that one either.
Well, I meant to tell you what I didn't understand, but I guess I offered more than that once I started typing. I do appreciate you and your interest in Christ and your fellow disciples of Christ.
Peace be with you. David Miller.
----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] A Divine Mystery - some questions from
John wrote:Here are some questions I am considering: Why is Paul's theology presented only is personal letters --- a style of presentation not found in First Testament scripture.
I think the primary answer to this lies in the admonition of Jesus to his disciples, that they teach all nations (Mat. 28:19). These letters are an expression of that teaching and shepherding ministry. We get a look into the example of his life through these letters.
John responds: (capital letters is the only way I can identify my comments -- I AM NOT YELLING.
IF THE AUTHORITATIVE APPEAL IS THE LIFE AND EXAMPLE OF THE LIVING CHRIST WITHIN (and I agree fully) -- WHY IS THAT NOT TRUE TODAY? (THINK "VERBAL AND PLENARY INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLICAL TEXT.) AND I AM ASKING ANYONE - NOT JUST DAVID. IT IS APPARENT TO ME THAT OFTEN, HERE ON TT, WE DO NOT GIVE ENOUGH HONOR TO THOSE WHO ARE TRULY SERVING JESUS -- INSISTING THAT WHAT WE THINK IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT THAN WHAT WE attempt TO DO.
Unlike the Hebrew prophets of the Hebrew Scriptures, the New Testament
apostles and prophets were heralds of Christ's life changing message. They
were not just delivering a message. They were changing lives. Also, they
were not just teaching, but shepherding the people. Most of this was done
directly, vocally, but Paul's education was such that he gave himself also
to writing, which was God's plan so that we would benefit from what he
wrote.
John wrote:Why is it not systematic in nature?
None of the Scriptures were systematic. Modern Theologians try to be
systematic, but all they are doing is studying and analyzing those who
appear to have successfully accomplished God's will. In Jesus day, they did
this too. That's what the scribes were. But ultimately, the ones who "get
it" are not the scholars (although their analysis is helpful), but rather
those who actually do the will of God.
We need to accept that God's will is to present his message in ambiguous
terms, in a mystery, so that only those who actually do his will and receive
his Spirit will know his doctrine (and I use "know" in its experiential
sense). The fact that Jesus always spoke in parables and not openly is one
testimony to this understanding. And Paul said he only spoke the wisdom of
God among those who are perfect.
PAUL BELIEVED THAT WE WERE PERFECTED BY ANOTHER. BUT MORE TO THE POINT OF THIS RATHER UNUSUAL CONCLUSION -- THE BIBLE CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD BY OTHERS THAN THOSE "INFILLED?"
John wrote:And ---- why does no NT writer quote Jesus in support of his individual theologies and admonitions. I would expect to find something to the effect of ---- "Jesus while on this earth, presented to us the very advice I am giving to you now. It is He who is the author and finisher of our faith -- my words are only a mirror of His earthly and present ministry." Seems reasonable to expect such wording. Not there at all.
Actually, you are overstating the case a little when you say, "not there at
all." For example, Paul said, "I have received of the Lord that which also
I delivered unto you..." (1 Cor. 11:23). He then goes on to quote Jesus,
"take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you" etc. Paul also quotes
the words of Jesus when relating his vision that he received on the road to
Damascus (e.g., Acts 22, 26). In Acts 23:11, Luke reports words of the
Lord Jesus spoken to Paul. In Acts 20:35, Paul quotes Jesus in his
argumentation to the elders of the church of Ephesus, "it is more blessed to
give than to receive." And we could continue with more.
SO MY QUESTION WAS WITHOUT MERIT? THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES DID NOT REFER THEIR THEOLOGY TO THE AUTHOR OF THE FAITH IN THE SAME WAY NOR TO THE SAME DEGREE WE MODERN DAY MINISTERS USE THE BIBLICAL TEXT. IS THERE A MESSAGE IN THERE FOR ANYONE AND, IF SO, WHAT IS IT? i DO AGREE THAT ONE'S EXAMPLE AS A TEACHER/EVANGELIST/PREACHER IS CRITICAL. IS THERE MORE TO A CONCLUSIVE ANSWER?
I think what you are recognizing here is that Paul and others incorporated
the teachings of Christ into their lives, so that what they said and did
were in fact the same as what the Lord did. Rather than being like the
scribes and scholars of their day who reported second hand what was true and
right, they lived it and represented it in person. They themselves became
first hand testimony to the Word of God.
God's desire is that we know the Living Word more than the Written Word.
COULDN'T AGREE MORE - SO WHY THE RANKER WHEN ONE IS SEEN AS MISAPPLYING SCRIPTURE? oNE OF MY FAVORITE THEOLOGIANS IS BONHOFFER AND THE REASON I GIVE HIM SOME ATTENTION IS THAT HE WAS WILLING TO DIE FOR THE LORD AND DIE AS A SSERVANT.
Relationship rather than head knowledge is what is important to God, and the
lack of a systematic Bible and crystal clear instructions put men into a
position to have to embrace the Living Word or be stuck with debatable
theories and disagreements concerning the knowledge of God.
HERE IS SOMETHING WELL STATED AND VERY MUCH THE FOUNDATIONAL BLOCK FOR THE CHRISTIAN "LIFESTYLE." ONE OUT OF TEN THEOLOGICAL ISSUES -- NOT BAD DAVID !! ESPECAILLY WHEN THIS ONE OVER-SHADOWS ALL THE OTHERS. a KEEPER.
jOHN
---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
