The Main Reason For So Much Division Among Christians
- Thread starter pinacled
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
And if you are honest with yourself as you read the old testament and the new testament
you can find that many of the apostles and even them like Mark and Luke who were not
apostles did not agree with each other on many points and you can read it in their accounts.
Even some of the prophets did not agree with each other.
Some times they were like the Christians of today.
They heard Jesus as they wanted to believe.
Not what He actually conveyed.
Don't you find it amazing they were with Jesus day in and day out pretty much all the time
for 3 years and they still argued with each other?
you can find that many of the apostles and even them like Mark and Luke who were not
apostles did not agree with each other on many points and you can read it in their accounts.
Even some of the prophets did not agree with each other.
Some times they were like the Christians of today.
They heard Jesus as they wanted to believe.
Not what He actually conveyed.
Don't you find it amazing they were with Jesus day in and day out pretty much all the time
for 3 years and they still argued with each other?
Last edited:
And I will tell you this...
You can even see the transition or evolution of how they believed
when they first started out in their book to where they
changed as they went along and wrote it.
For example like if you wrote a diary over a period of your lifetime.
You would see the changes as the years go by in the way you feel and believe and your outlook.
You can see it in many of their writings.
You can even see the transition or evolution of how they believed
when they first started out in their book to where they
changed as they went along and wrote it.
For example like if you wrote a diary over a period of your lifetime.
You would see the changes as the years go by in the way you feel and believe and your outlook.
You can see it in many of their writings.
God's word is wonderfully deep and without a doubt there is generally one central truth to every verse, but...having said that I will also say that the word is also very deep and layered and numerous truths and ever deeper truths can be gleaned based upon the level of maturity found in any given believer....I have seen God use one word to teach numerous levels of truth.....when studied from the Hebrew or Greek......just a point to ponder!
B
I love this saints, a forum that has come together to reason, for a added in put I believe it is why people search the scriptures is it to justify a action or to prove a point...etc Jesus said seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and all shall be added on..God's true heart and desires are found in his word when you seek his face then you will have the true meaning. Just a thought.
It is very rare that two believers are at the exact same level of spiritual growth/understanding at the exact same time in my opinion. It is also my opinion that the Holy Spirit reveals to a believer what they are in need of at the particular time they are searching for guidance, comfort, enlightenment, whatever.
I have been criticized quite often for believing this, but I really don't mind, for the Apostle Paul did the very same thing. He taught the new converts what they were able to digest, and not what they would choke on.
I have been criticized quite often for believing this, but I really don't mind, for the Apostle Paul did the very same thing. He taught the new converts what they were able to digest, and not what they would choke on.
Except that each of us feels we do..... even the Westboro Sickies.
You can ridicule any group you choose, but, in the end, you have to come down to admitting that NO ONE is going to follow what they think is wrong.
You feel you are more right than I am, and I feel the same about you......... Guess what? That probably makes BOTH of us wrong in God's heart.
You can ridicule any group you choose, but, in the end, you have to come down to admitting that NO ONE is going to follow what they think is wrong.
You feel you are more right than I am, and I feel the same about you......... Guess what? That probably makes BOTH of us wrong in God's heart.
Biblical backgrounds is essential for anyone wanting to move forward in their understanding of God's Word.
That means understanding the history, the geography, the genre, the themes of each book, and the time the book was written. Many mistakes in interpreting the Bible would be solved if people would look at the context of the passage, the chapter, the book, the Testament, the Bible and Jesus Christ.
The context is so important, and you just cannot rip verses out of context and expect to have a coherent understanding of what God was doing for his people at that time, and which parts apply to today.
This is basic hermeneutics or Bible Interpretation. Then, we do need to pray and ask the Holy Spirit to use the backgrounds to really show us how it applies to our lives.
I would disagree with the fact that the prophets disagreed with each other. I have read the Bible from cover to cover at least 50 times, and studied it myself, in Seminary and in church. When there are apparent contradictions, CONTEXT usually explains the issue. God is not the author of confusion.
That means understanding the history, the geography, the genre, the themes of each book, and the time the book was written. Many mistakes in interpreting the Bible would be solved if people would look at the context of the passage, the chapter, the book, the Testament, the Bible and Jesus Christ.
The context is so important, and you just cannot rip verses out of context and expect to have a coherent understanding of what God was doing for his people at that time, and which parts apply to today.
This is basic hermeneutics or Bible Interpretation. Then, we do need to pray and ask the Holy Spirit to use the backgrounds to really show us how it applies to our lives.
I would disagree with the fact that the prophets disagreed with each other. I have read the Bible from cover to cover at least 50 times, and studied it myself, in Seminary and in church. When there are apparent contradictions, CONTEXT usually explains the issue. God is not the author of confusion.
D
From what I understand staying put (in a certain location) in scripture to remain in context is not always necessary. It depends on what you are proving.
We know when the apostles preached Jesus Christ they used the OT ( the things old) to prove Him (whom) they did testify of (John 5:39) and out of whom would come the NT (things new)
Using Paul as an example (below) of how the Holy Spirit led him we can trace the "Spirit's path" which I actually think is pretty cool. Paul (to some) would not be an "in context" expounder (as many might count one) as he utilized all the scriptures (or all the various books) at the same time (into a single paragraph). The author being with Paul.
This most clearly shown in Romans 10 (verses 1-21). Which is probably easier to catch if you have a "footnoted bible" in front of you. The footnotes actually help to show the paths of the apostles words so we can see (from where) these things were written (as they brought them forward in Christ to argue their points in the NT). So I thank God for the footnotes.
In the below Paul is shown making use of many books to write one "single paragraph" on the righteousness of Christ.
I just thought it was interesting to observe how the Holy Spirit led Paul to reason "out of" the OT scriptures in the process of the NT epistles. When you lay it out , you can really see how Paul jumps around, and so these show the footprints of the Holy Spirit here. A pretty good example of this is found in Romans 10:1-21.
Paul pulls these particular verses out from their contexts to make his argument of the righteouesness of Christ
in Romans 10:1-21
Here is the order of them (excluding his "interjections")
Paul starts in... Lev 18:5...
Then he turns to.... Duet 30:12-14 (two verses here)
next he goes into... Isaiah 28:16
...he immediately turns to... Joel 2:32
... he returns back to.... Isaiah 52:7
....Then skips "up to".... Isaiah 53:1
.... he then turns to.... Psalms 19:4
.... reaches back into .....Duet 32:21
..... and now he reaches further up to.... Isaiah 65:1-2 (two verses here)
All of those books together just to make a single point in that very small part in Romans (which consists of 21 verses). And here would be looking at the most compact example of an Apostle reasoning out of the OT (in the NT) as I was trying to find an example full of scriptures (pulled from everywhere) with far less said in between (at least as far as an apostle's interjecting might go).
So that paragraph is truly 21 verses long.
11 of those 21 verses come from 5 different books. But even then they are not gathered out of the same parts (and/or reasoned with) as if with that which might have been pulled from the same chapters of those very same books. They are all single verse pulls and only twice are 2 verses ever taken at one time in Paul's argument (in Duet 30:12-14 & Isaiah 65:1-2 in the first and the last portion ). The rest "is Paul" interjecting between these 11 verses as he is "reasoning with" all the others (from just about everywhere) bring all of them into one paragraph. He certainly doesnt stay stationary, but jumps forward in books and chapters and then back into the earlier books and forwards again.
How is that for staying with the authors intent (of all those places, in their contexts) or remaining "in context"? Well, at least if that is how in context (as a rule) were to be understood and shown to be (meaning the book itself) or the chapter of the book itself. How would one find the authrs intent in all of those (combined) or Paul's "sense of context" the way context is sometimes thrown at posts (without ever given reasons as to why its so "out of context" so Pauls might make a good one to cross examine, to prove and give a standard of some sort in respects to his own context (which Paul utilized the same to form in the NT).
We know when the apostles preached Jesus Christ they used the OT ( the things old) to prove Him (whom) they did testify of (John 5:39) and out of whom would come the NT (things new)
Using Paul as an example (below) of how the Holy Spirit led him we can trace the "Spirit's path" which I actually think is pretty cool. Paul (to some) would not be an "in context" expounder (as many might count one) as he utilized all the scriptures (or all the various books) at the same time (into a single paragraph). The author being with Paul.
This most clearly shown in Romans 10 (verses 1-21). Which is probably easier to catch if you have a "footnoted bible" in front of you. The footnotes actually help to show the paths of the apostles words so we can see (from where) these things were written (as they brought them forward in Christ to argue their points in the NT). So I thank God for the footnotes.
In the below Paul is shown making use of many books to write one "single paragraph" on the righteousness of Christ.
I just thought it was interesting to observe how the Holy Spirit led Paul to reason "out of" the OT scriptures in the process of the NT epistles. When you lay it out , you can really see how Paul jumps around, and so these show the footprints of the Holy Spirit here. A pretty good example of this is found in Romans 10:1-21.
Paul pulls these particular verses out from their contexts to make his argument of the righteouesness of Christ
in Romans 10:1-21
Here is the order of them (excluding his "interjections")
Paul starts in... Lev 18:5...
Then he turns to.... Duet 30:12-14 (two verses here)
next he goes into... Isaiah 28:16
...he immediately turns to... Joel 2:32
... he returns back to.... Isaiah 52:7
....Then skips "up to".... Isaiah 53:1
.... he then turns to.... Psalms 19:4
.... reaches back into .....Duet 32:21
..... and now he reaches further up to.... Isaiah 65:1-2 (two verses here)
All of those books together just to make a single point in that very small part in Romans (which consists of 21 verses). And here would be looking at the most compact example of an Apostle reasoning out of the OT (in the NT) as I was trying to find an example full of scriptures (pulled from everywhere) with far less said in between (at least as far as an apostle's interjecting might go).
So that paragraph is truly 21 verses long.
11 of those 21 verses come from 5 different books. But even then they are not gathered out of the same parts (and/or reasoned with) as if with that which might have been pulled from the same chapters of those very same books. They are all single verse pulls and only twice are 2 verses ever taken at one time in Paul's argument (in Duet 30:12-14 & Isaiah 65:1-2 in the first and the last portion ). The rest "is Paul" interjecting between these 11 verses as he is "reasoning with" all the others (from just about everywhere) bring all of them into one paragraph. He certainly doesnt stay stationary, but jumps forward in books and chapters and then back into the earlier books and forwards again.
How is that for staying with the authors intent (of all those places, in their contexts) or remaining "in context"? Well, at least if that is how in context (as a rule) were to be understood and shown to be (meaning the book itself) or the chapter of the book itself. How would one find the authrs intent in all of those (combined) or Paul's "sense of context" the way context is sometimes thrown at posts (without ever given reasons as to why its so "out of context" so Pauls might make a good one to cross examine, to prove and give a standard of some sort in respects to his own context (which Paul utilized the same to form in the NT).
Paul is a man after my own heart. 
1 Corinthians 2:13
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1 Corinthians 2:13
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
D
Paul is a man after my own heart.
1 Corinthians 2:13
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1 Corinthians 2:13
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
Good verse, peace
Last edited:
P
I enjoyed going over Romans like that. I always look up Old Testament verses when they're referenced in the New Testament, but as many times as I've read the epistle to the Romans before I never noticed that chapter 10 verse 18 was a direct quote from Psalm 19. Thanks for pointing that out.
That said, I don't think that this counters the in context argument. Paul did pull verses from all over the place, but I don't believe that he ever altered God's original intent for those verses. Instead, I believe that God used Paul to reveal a lot of things which were in plain sight all along yet not really understood by the majority of those who were reading them.
That said, I don't think that this counters the in context argument. Paul did pull verses from all over the place, but I don't believe that he ever altered God's original intent for those verses. Instead, I believe that God used Paul to reveal a lot of things which were in plain sight all along yet not really understood by the majority of those who were reading them.