Logic vs The Bible

[Sirk]

Someone told me these three rules (broadly similar ones, maybe?):

Before doing something, you need to figure three things:

1) Where are you going?

2) How will you get there?

3) How will you know when you have arrived?

Blessings.

Short and sweet my Canadian friend. That's what I like about you.

 

[faroukfarouk]

What relevance would these three questions have in the reading of scripture?

I guess the application would be broader than Scripture reading.

I guess though that an underlying application would be the observation that everyone brings assumptions in one way or another in the reading of Scripture.

Personally I'm dispensational. I do respect some Reformed writers, although some of their ideas I struggle with.

So if we read about Israel, then: what about Israel when one comes across the term in Scripture?

If we read about the church, then: what about the church when the term is mentioned in Scripture?

If we read about the coming of the Lord, then, in the connection of whom is the coming mentioned? etc. and therefor which coming?

(I'm probably not explaining myself well...)

Blessings.

 

[Sirk]

I guess the application would be broader than Scripture reading.

I guess though that an underlying application would be the observation that everyone brings assumptions in one way or another in the reading of Scripture.

Personally I'm dispensational. I do respect some Reformed writers, although some of their ideas I struggle with.

So if we read about Israel, then: what about Israel when one comes across the term in Scripture?

If we read about the church, then: what about the church when the term is mentioned in Scripture?

If we read about the coming of the Lord, then, in the connection of whom is the coming mentioned? etc. and therefor which coming?

(I'm probably not explaining myself well...)

Blessings.

the way I took it was that each of the questions were a self reflection and a seeking of Gods will....a revelation perhaps.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Short and sweet my Canadian friend. That's what I like about you.

It can be applied to tattoos as well, but it's a bit off topic; I could pm you...

 

[faroukfarouk]

View attachment 78806

..................

He himself was an academically and professionally accomplished individual.

 

[oldhermit]

I guess the application would be broader than Scripture reading.

I guess though that an underlying application would be the observation that everyone brings assumptions in one way or another in the reading of Scripture.

And here in lies the problem. This is part of what Pozessed and I were discussing on another thread about the difference between the interpretive approach to the reading of scripture (which is always a mistake) vs that of learning to generalize from the text. The challenge is to teach one's self to NEVER approach the text with any assumptions. This is a learned discipline.

 

[Sirk]

And here in lies the problem. This is part of what Pozessed and I were discussing on another thread about the difference between the interpretive approach to the reading of scripture (which is always a mistake) vs that of learning to generalize from the text. The challenge is to teach one's self to NEVER approach the text with any assumptions. This is a learned discipline.

Can you give us an example of a not so obvious way that we would bring an assumption to scripture?

 

[faroukfarouk]

And here in lies the problem. This is part of what Pozessed and I were discussing on another thread about the difference between the interpretive approach to the reading of scripture (which is always a mistake) vs that of learning to generalize from the text. The challenge is to teach one's self to NEVER approach the text with any assumptions. This is a learned discipline.

Do I assume that Scripture is an extension of myself and the world?

Or do I assume that God actually wrote it?

Do I assume that the Jews in the Old Testament are the same as the folk who meet Sundays as a church at Z. Wilbur Dinkleburger Junior High?

We think we are reading without pre-conceptions, but in practice we do bring assumptions, one way or another.

Yes, we need to be thoroughly grounded in Scripture so that we can make sense better, as led of the Spirit, and rightly divide the word of truth.

Blessings.

 

[oldhermit]

Can you give us an example of a not so obvious way that we would bring an assumption to scripture?

I will give you one that we see on this site all the time. When you read John 1 do you begin reading that text with an already established idea that Jesus is God or that he is not God?

 

[oldhermit]

Do I assume that Scripture is an extension of myself and the world?

Or do I assume that God actually wrote it?

Never begin the reading of any text with any assumption. It is important that we never bring anything of our own into the text.
What does the text say of its origin?

Do I assume that the Jews in the Old Testament are the same as the folk who meet Sundays as a church at Z. Wilbur Dinkleburger Junior High?

I really do not to understand the relevance of this question.

We think we are reading without pre-conceptions, but in practice we do bring assumptions, one way or another.

Like I said earlier, this is a learned discipline. Do I think we will ever be able to totally be free of this? I would have to say no. We are all products of our culture and environment. However, the more one exercises this approach in reading scripture, the better one becomes.

 

[Sirk]

I will give you one that we see on this site all the time. When you read John 1 do you begin reading that text with an already established idea that Jesus is God or that he is not God?

I do bring that assumption. If I understand you correctly, assumptions are like a glitch that will hinder the Holy Spirit speaking to you thru the word?

 

[iamsoandso]

so the newly converted Christians who lived in say "gaul/france spain ect." who did not have a copy of the bible we have today,or the online hebrew/greek ect. so they could pick the scriptures apart,or who may have not even known how to read,,,,,,,were they all lost?,,,,Are we the present generation that has these tools and break down each and every scripture,word for word in it's original language,are we the onley lucky generation who came to the full knowledge and are saved?,,,

indeed how simple is the truth,not how complicated, where is the truth that a dumb man can obtain? where is the truth that the ignorant can obtain? where is the truth that was spoken in 258ad when none knew the books to read?,,we spend much time explaining the Iotas and Etta,,but never the millions of Christians before us who never had a bible to read,and most probably the knowledge to read it even if they possessed one. where is the truth from before today and all our science???,,,,

 

[oldhermit]

I do bring that assumption. If I understand you correctly, assumptions are like a glitch that will hinder the Holy Spirit speaking to you thru the word?

It is better to approach the text with no assumptions, even if those assumptions may prove to be true. I have spent many years teaching classes on the nature of God but no matter how many time I have examined John 1, I try never to approach it with any preconceptions about what I think this text says. We never knows what we will see that we have never seen before, perhaps because the Lord was not ready for us to see it. It is critical that we allow scripture its agential place in relation to the mind of man while man assumes the patient relationship.

 

[Sirk]

It is better to approach the text with no assumptions, even if those assumptions may prove to be true. I have spent many years teaching classes on the nature of God but no matter how many time I have examined John 1, I try never to approach it with any preconceptions about what I think this text says. We never knows what we will see that we have never seen before, perhaps because the Lord was not ready for us to see it. It is critical that we allow scripture its agential place in relation to the mind of man while man assumes the patient relationship.

I have to admit that I've never considered that approach and that I like it. The word of God stands on its own and doesn't need our biases assumptions or defending.

 

[faroukfarouk]

Never begin the reading of any text with any assumption. It is important that we never bring anything of our own into the text.
What does the text say of its origin?



I really do not to understand the relevance of this question.



Like I said earlier, this is a learned discipline. Do I think we will ever be able to totally be free of this? I would have to say no. We are all products of our culture and environment. However, the more one exercises this approach in reading scripture, the better one becomes.

Okay, Sir, thanks for the good feedback.

I got baggage.

My baggage is: I have been around Reformed Christians. Lots of them read the Old Testament and then say: okay so we better go do what the patriarchs just did here. Then one of them says: Hey wait a minute, what will my wife say if I start to 'do the duty of an husband's brother'? Then they get bogged down interpretationally, without wanting to admit that the church and Israel are really distinct.

You don't seem to hear them saying: 'Sorry, Brother Dude can't make here tonight it to lead the Bible study, because he's ceremonially unclean'.

I wholeheartedly agree we should 'receive meekly the engrafted Word'.

So often there is baggage.

I have to admit I find C I Scofield and J N Darby helpful.

Blessings.

 

[Spokenpassage]

I have to admit that I've never considered that approach and that I like it. The word of God stands on its own and doesn't need our biases assumptions or defending.

"Defend the Bible? I would as soon defend a lion! Unchain it and it will defend itself"

- Charles Spurgeon

 

[faroukfarouk]

"Defend the Bible? I would as soon defend a lion! Unchain it and it will defend itself"

- Charles Spurgeon

This is why some people think Reaganomics is Biblical: rather than try to defend capitalism, you let the business community take care of itself, and all the other benefits will accrue.

I agree with the Spurgeon quote.

 

[Sirk]

I agree with the Spurgeon quote.

me too......

 

[ob77]

Hello all. I am interested in your opinions about this. I am not trying to criticize anyone particular but I do want to discuss something said to me earlier.
I suggested we were "mere infants in this universe". I was asked how I came up with that. I replied, "it's my own logic".
I was later told that I am not to use my own logic when referencing God and the Bible.

This seems a bit skeptical to me. If we didn't use our own logic to determine the revelations God directs us towards, we would still be stuck with many laws and tribulations our society now would be morally disgusted by.

Thoughts?

We are still under God's laws, and why would anyone be "disgusted" by them? If they came from God, they are perfect. One can live in denial and arrange things in one's mind to make anything seem as they wish. The bible is not illogical. If one finds contradictions, and there are, but not from the mouth of God, but by the translators, one needs to dig for the truth to resolve these contradictions. We are not "infants" in this universe, for we were with the Father before the world was framed.
We may be relatively newcomers to earth in flesh bodies, but not in existence. We are older than you think, but time has no meaning to those living in the celestial plane, where we came from and will return to.
Time is everlasting. You cannot pinpoint when time began, nor can you determine when it will end, for to reach the end, you will find the beginning. It is a cycle, or a circle. It is the alpha and the omega. It is eternally the beginning and the new beginning.

 

[Atwood]

I believe that logic coincides with the Bible. Someone else told me this in a chat room here. I can't remember who said it, even if I did I wouldn't call them out directly.

How would this be related to a straw man, this is not a debate but rather a discussion.

Well we agree then on logic. Can this be the progression (retrogression) discussion -> disgustion -> debate -> brass knuckles? LOL