Do we understand biblical truths

  • 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.
rewriter said:
Since you saw fit to at least post something, would you care to try a simple example? The term salvation gets thrown around a lot, can you explain what it is in everyday language? Or if that is too hard, and that is quite possible, how about explaining what "sin" is without referencing God, yet keeping it simple enough for most people to understand.

Personally, I find either question fairly easy, but then I have been wrestling with the problem for over 50 years, approximately 40 years while following tradition and not really getting anywhere though, but once I got outside the box that tradition puts us in, things started getting easy.
Click to expand...
The Greek word sOzO, I save, comes from the root sOs/saOs meaning safe and the infix "-iz-“ meaning to make, hence I am making safe.

SotEria, salvation, means the state of being safe. This can be produced via a deliverance, a healing, forgiveness or a revelation of truth, among other means.

The Greek words for "I am sinning" are “hamartanO" which means "I am missing the target aimed for", and parabainO, which means "I am transgressing, I am walking (bainO) beside (para), rather than on a prescribed path.
 
Early in my walk I strongly focused on the otiot and strongs and any source that helped me get as close to the original meanings as I was able. God has long since pressed it on my heart that the semantics often aren't as important as the principals still present to this day. What is most important is the constant guidance of the Holy spirit and an earnest desire to conform to Him.

I have seen so many people so focused on little details that they miss the whole picture.

When some people want to share something that was important in their own walk it can be helpful to remember God can teach us children differently and still lead us to the same principal. What may have seemed vital to one may be near useless to the other, and that's ok. He is still their teacher if they love Him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dino246
PaulThomson said:
The Greek word sOzO, I save, comes from the root sOs/saOs meaning safe and the infix "-iz-“ meaning to make, hence I am making safe.

SotEria, salvation, means the state of being safe. This can be produced via a deliverance, a healing, forgiveness or a revelation of truth, among other means.

The Greek words for "I am sinning" are “hamartanO" which means "I am missing the target aimed for", and parabainO, which means "I am transgressing, I am walking (bainO) beside (para), rather than on a prescribed path.
Click to expand...
Very good, now safe from what real and present danger or problem, not a hypothetical one? And missing what clear and obvious mark, again not a hypothetical one. And do not seek to extend the question by posing anything that you cannot back up with clear evidence. If you cite God in any way, then provide clear independent evidence for God.

And by the way, I would maintain that we now seem to have (found sometime after 1979 and before 2007) clear and objective evidence for the existence of an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful and just entity, very close to but not perfectly aligned with the Christian God, but if you know the evidence I am surprised at some of the questions you ask on related topics.
 
rewriter said:
Very good, now safe from what real and present danger or problem, not a hypothetical one? And missing what clear and obvious mark, again not a hypothetical one. And do not seek to extend the question by posing anything that you cannot back up with clear evidence. If you cite God in any way, then provide clear independent evidence for God.

And by the way, I would maintain that we now seem to have (found sometime after 1979 and before 2007) clear and objective evidence for the existence of an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful and just entity, very close to but not perfectly aligned with the Christian God, but if you know the evidence I am surprised at some of the questions you ask on related topics.
Click to expand...
Through the deliverance, healing, forgveness and truth that is available to us in Jesus Christ our Lord, we are made safe from demonic oppression, sickness, resentment and lies. But fundamentally, we are saved from that sense of being not really acceptable to God so that he has somewhat against us, which makes us vulnerable to the aforementioned.

Missing the mark of communion with the Living God.

Evidence for God? The things that are being done by Him in His first creation, and in His new creation among and through His people, including me.
Rom 1:19
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Rom 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by His workmanship (poiEmasin), even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Eph 2:10
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

The evidence for an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful and just entity, exactly like the biblical God, was given 2000 years ago in the incarnation, life, death, resurrection and exaltation of the Word as Jesus of Nazareth.
 
And the biblical standard for knowing the truth is access to eyewitness testimony that can be questioned by anyone. This is not written records that have passed through a number of hands, so the Bible does not meet its own criteria. As for living Christians, they could be good, but if their testimony is the same as that from believers of some other religion how do you distinguish which is true by any means other than purely subjective, "I want this testimony to be true, but not that testimony", that any person questioning can agree with.
 
rewriter said:
And the biblical standard for knowing the truth is access to eyewitness testimony that can be questioned by anyone. This is not written records that have passed through a number of hands, so the Bible does not meet its own criteria. As for living Christians, they could be good, but if their testimony is the same as that from believers of some other religion how do you distinguish which is true by any means other than purely subjective, "I want this testimony to be true, but not that testimony", that any person questioning can agree with.
Click to expand...

Eyewitnesses when possible; credible witnesses is the next best biblical standard (2Tim. 3:14-15).
 
GWH said:
Eyewitnesses when possible; credible witnesses is the next best biblical standard (2Tim. 3:14-15).
Click to expand...
The biblical standard for establishing the truth does not have a second-best option. 2 Timothy gets misunderstood. If, as some claim, it is not Pauline then we must wonder who wrote it and how reliable they are. It was accepted as scripture largely based on its supposed Pauline authorship.
 
rewriter said:
The biblical standard for establishing the truth does not have a second-best option. 2 Timothy gets misunderstood. If, as some claim, it is not Pauline then we must wonder who wrote it and how reliable they are. It was accepted as scripture largely based on its supposed Pauline authorship.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does, as every legal system does, because it is not always possible to have eye-witness testimony.
Thus, we must accept or reject the Pauline authorship for other reasons, since did not see him write it.
 
GWH said:
Yes, it does, as every legal system does, because it is not always possible to have eye-witness testimony.
Thus, we must accept or reject the Pauline authorship for other reasons, since did not see him write it.
Click to expand...
True, but we must also consider, we do know that Paul was not the true author, rather Paul was behind the ideas that he expressed to the person who did the actual writing, as Paul was not a professional writer. Secondly, we must consider the "sense of the times" when Paul was dictating his thoughts. Might there have been changes in the realities he was perceiving over time. If Paul had been arrested on a charge of treason, how did his time of exile influence his views? Did the political landscape change drastically enough for him to amend his message?

Now the first well-documented case of Christian persecution occurred in 64 CE. What actually led up to it and what excuse came into being later? Why were the initial official punishments the same as for high treason, and why did future punishments correspond in kind, even if the excuse was failure to sacrifice to the emperor especially when such an offense could sometimes, actually often, be ignored.

Paul's authorship of the Pastorals is disputed, with both sides making their claims, and conservative and liberals on both sides of the arguments.
 
If I understand correctly this was the intent of your OP:

"Should we not allow Him to guide us in updating the language we use to be as certain as possible that we are communicating His message in today's words?"

As worthy as your goal may be, that is an impossibility. There are an estimated 450 English Bible versions available today. Every one of them attempted to do just a you now hope.

Sadly, the task of uncovering truth will remain difficult and challenging and not everyone will be up to the task. Just about any good translation will give you the gravy, digging is necessary to get to the potatoes.
 
rewriter said:
True, but we must also consider, we do know that Paul was not the true author, rather Paul was behind the ideas that he expressed to the person who did the actual writing, as Paul was not a professional writer. Secondly, we must consider the "sense of the times" when Paul was dictating his thoughts. Might there have been changes in the realities he was perceiving over time. If Paul had been arrested on a charge of treason, how did his time of exile influence his views? Did the political landscape change drastically enough for him to amend his message?

Now the first well-documented case of Christian persecution occurred in 64 CE. What actually led up to it and what excuse came into being later? Why were the initial official punishments the same as for high treason, and why did future punishments correspond in kind, even if the excuse was failure to sacrifice to the emperor especially when such an offense could sometimes, actually often, be ignored.

Paul's authorship of the Pastorals is disputed, with both sides making their claims, and conservative and liberals on both sides of the arguments.
Click to expand...

Yes, we should consider all of the evidence, and I see nothing in any of the Pauline epistles that causes me to conclude he was not behind the amensuensis, however that is spelled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rewriter
rewriter said:
True, but we must also consider, we do know that Paul was not the true author, rather Paul was behind the ideas that he expressed to the person who did the actual writing, as Paul was not a professional writer.
Click to expand...
If a modern CEO dictates a letter to a secretary who types it, who is the “true author”?

No rational person is going to claim that the secretary is the author. That’s why signature blocks used to have “DF/st” or something similar. That was not the convention in the first century.

Let’s not muddy the waters with irrelevant technical nuances.
 
rewriter said:
The Bible does present truth to us. but do we understand what it says? The truth was originally expressed in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek at time ranging from 3000+ years ago to as recently as about 1950 years ago. These truths were then translated into Lati, again over 1000 years ago, and later translated into English and other languages. But how much has been lost from the original meanings? Is it time to very carefully study and seek to update the language rather than simply repeat how the original message has been translated, trusting that nothing has changed in meaning? Poke carries at least two meanings, one not very commonly used in today's world. The meaning of "hell" has likewise changed over time. Salvation originally was associated with healing, but healing from what? Sin is a term applied to a few different ancient words, did all carry the same meaning do you think, and if so, why were different terms used.

God does not change and His message does not change, but God used three different ancient languages to present His message so that the people would hear it in the language of their day, updating terms as the ancient languages evolved. Should we not allow Him to guide us in updating the language we use to be as certain as possible that we are communicating His message in today's words?
Click to expand...
They asked them "Have you received the holy Spirit since you believed?" Have you? Luke 11:13? The "word" is in us.. the sweet sweet holy Spirit is in us leads us guides us into all truth. Does He not know His own word? Faith
 
Dino246 said:
If a modern CEO dictates a letter to a secretary who types it, who is the “true author”?

No rational person is going to claim that the secretary is the author. That’s why signature blocks used to have “DF/st” or something similar. That was not the convention in the first century.

Let’s not muddy the waters with irrelevant technical nuances.
Click to expand...
One of the questions was regarding the change in vocabulary. A different actual composer can make such a difference, Paul approved the final version, but did not dictate the exact words. You do not seem to understand how ancient letters were written.
 
Blade said:
They asked them "Have you received the holy Spirit since you believed?" Have you? Luke 11:13? The "word" is in us.. the sweet sweet holy Spirit is in us leads us guides us into all truth. Does He not know His own word? Faith
Click to expand...
God knows what He has said, as well as what He meant. But do we? Many passages can be taken more than one way. Today's church follows an approach that leaves many "unsolvable" questions on "minor" problems. But what if a change in understanding resolves the "minor" issues in a way that fits with a different, more consistent message.
 
rewriter said:
One of the questions was regarding the change in vocabulary. A different actual composer can make such a difference, Paul approved the final version, but did not dictate the exact words. You do not seem to understand how ancient letters were written.
Click to expand...
Your assumptions about my understanding are quite unnecessary.
 
Use AI to exegete the original Hebrew and Greek, the root words not reflected in English.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back