How do preachers or teachers explain this?

[Godsgood]

The Bible is God's word. As 2 Timothy 3:16 says, it is inspired, or breathed out, by Him. You say that unless we have a divine revelation from God of Who the Lord Jesus Christ is, our understanding cannot be said to come from God. So do you believe that the Bible is a book written by men and not the word of God?

That's a good question. However, what is written in the Holy Scriptures is, in the first place, the letter.
Although it is truly the Word of God, Scripture says, "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Corinthians 3:6).
Therefore, you cannot simply conclude that the literal meaning of the written words is, in itself, the fullness of the truth.

It is God's revelation of what is written that makes His truth known.
The Spirit reveals the deeper, spiritual meaning of God's Word, and it is this revelation that gives life.
Without God's revelation, a person may understand the words intellectually yet still fail to grasp the spiritual truth God intends to communicate.

Have you still not understood what is written in John 2:19–21?
When the Lord said, "Destroy this temple," the word temple, although it was the Lord's own word, was not yet the truth in its intended meaning.
JOHN 2:19-20
19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

It was the Lord's revelation that the "temple" referred to His body that revealed the truth. The spiritual meaning disclosed by the Lord is the truth, not merely the literal word itself.
JOHN 2:21
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

 

[rewriter]

Once again in this forum, the pot calls the kettle black.

 

[Dino246]

That's a good question. However I’m no longer sure whether I should continue answering you.

I didn't ask a question.

From what I can see, you don’t seem to be seeking the truth.
You appear to be completely convinced that your beliefs are already the truth.
If that’s the case, what value would there be in my responding to you?
There wouldn’t be any.

I am completely convinced that your position is wrong, because it contradicts the Bible.

 

[Dino246]

That's a good question. However, what is written in the Holy Scriptures is, in the first place, the letter.
Although it is truly the Word of God, Scripture says, "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Corinthians 3:6).
Therefore, you cannot simply conclude that the literal meaning of the written words is, in itself, the fullness of the truth.

You have ignored the context of Paul's statement.

We do not "simply conclude that the literal meaning of the written words is, in itself, the fullness of the truth."

However, we START with the literal meaning of the written words and don't ASSUME that there is more to it. Instead we seek understanding from God and apply hermeneutical principles to determine whether there may be more.

It is God's revelation of what is written that makes His truth known.
The Spirit reveals the deeper, spiritual meaning of God's Word, and it is this revelation that gives life.
Without God's revelation, a person may understand the words intellectually yet still fail to grasp the spiritual truth God intends to communicate.

Scripture itself is truth. It is not "half truth" or "inadequate truth". A person may never understand anything beyond the written text and still know the one true God rightly and be in right relationship with Him because the truth leading to these things is plain in Scripture.

What you advocate is esoteric gnosticism.

Have you still not understood what is written in John 2:19–21?

Your arrogance is astounding. You assume without any evidence whatsoever that David doesn't understand what is written in this passage, because you read the explanation. You seem to think that others can't read, or that the explanation provided in plain language in Scripture is beyond the understanding of others who can read.

 

[DavidLamb]

That's a good question. However, what is written in the Holy Scriptures is, in the first place, the letter.
Although it is truly the Word of God, Scripture says, "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Corinthians 3:6).
Therefore, you cannot simply conclude that the literal meaning of the written words is, in itself, the fullness of the truth.

Except where we have good reason not to take a literal meaning (for example, when Jesus used word-pictures, like saying He is the door, the light of the world, etc.) why should we not take the Bible literally? John wrote:

1Jn 5:13 NKJV These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Would you claim that those words have a non-literal meaning?

It is God's revelation of what is written that makes His truth known.
The Spirit reveals the deeper, spiritual meaning of God's Word, and it is this revelation that gives life.
Without God's revelation, a person may understand the words intellectually yet still fail to grasp the spiritual truth God intends to communicate.

We certainly need the Holy Spirit to make God's word clear to us, but that does not involve private revelations.

Have you still not understood what is written in John 2:19–21?
When the Lord said, "Destroy this temple," the word temple, although it was the Lord's own word, was not yet the truth in its intended meaning.
JOHN 2:19-20
19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

Yes, verse 21 makes clear what Jesus meant:

Jhn 2:19 Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Jhn 2:20 Then the Jews said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?"
Jhn 2:21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

So the context itself makes clear that by "temple" Jesus meant His body.

It was the Lord's revelation that the "temple" referred to His body that revealed the truth. The spiritual meaning disclosed by the Lord is the truth, not merely the literal word itself.
JOHN 2:21
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.

Yes, but that also is written in the Bible. It isn't an extra revelation given to some Christians and not others.

 

[Godsgood]

Except where we have good reason not to take a literal meaning (for example, when Jesus used word-pictures, like saying He is the door, the light of the world, etc.) why should we not take the Bible literally? John wrote:

1Jn 5:13 NKJV These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Would you claim that those words have a non-literal meaning?


We certainly need the Holy Spirit to make God's word clear to us, but that does not involve private revelations.

Yes, verse 21 makes clear what Jesus meant:

Jhn 2:19 Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Jhn 2:20 Then the Jews said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?"
Jhn 2:21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

So the context itself makes clear that by "temple" Jesus meant His body.

Yes, but that also is written in the Bible. It isn't an extra revelation given to some Christians and not others.

Except where we have good reason not to take a literal meaning (for example, when Jesus used word-pictures, like saying He is the door, the light of the world, etc.) why should we not take the Bible literally? John wrote:
1Jn 5:13 NKJV These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Would you claim that those words have a non-literal meaning?

Do you maintain that only what is written in Scripture can be considered the truth?


We certainly need the Holy Spirit to make God's word clear to us, but that does not involve private revelations.

Anyone who does not know the one true God also does not know the Holy Spirit.


Jhn 2:19 Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Jhn 2:20 Then the Jews said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?"
Jhn 2:21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

So the context itself makes clear that by "temple" Jesus meant His body.

Yes, but that also is written in the Bible. It isn't an extra revelation given to some Christians and not others.

John 2:21 is not merely stating that the temple Jesus referred to was His body.
Rather, it demonstrates that the literal wording of God's message is not yet the truth in itself.
The truth is the revelation He gives concerning His words.

 

[DavidLamb]

Except where we have good reason not to take a literal meaning (for example, when Jesus used word-pictures, like saying He is the door, the light of the world, etc.) why should we not take the Bible literally? John wrote:
1Jn 5:13 NKJV These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Would you claim that those words have a non-literal meaning?

Do you maintain that only what is written in Scripture can be considered the truth?

No. There are truths of everyday life that are not written in the Scriptures. "The square root of 100 is 10," is true, but it is not stated in Scripture. "King Charles III has a sister named Ann," is another truth not in Scripture. However, Scripture if the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice.

We certainly need the Holy Spirit to make God's word clear to us, but that does not involve private revelations.

Anyone who does not know the one true God also does not know the Holy Spirit.

I agree.

Jhn 2:19 Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Jhn 2:20 Then the Jews said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?"
Jhn 2:21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.

So the context itself makes clear that by "temple" Jesus meant His body.

Yes, but that also is written in the Bible. It isn't an extra revelation given to some Christians and not others.

John 2:21 is not merely stating that the temple Jesus referred to was His body.
Rather, it demonstrates that the literal wording of God's message is not yet the truth in itself.
The truth is the revelation He gives concerning His words.

Yes, that is what I said. John explains in verse 21 that in verse 19, Jesus had been using picture-language. But both verses are in God's word. A special revelation from God is not necessary to tell us that Jesus meant His body, not the temple of stone.

 

[dkontner]

Jesus is the word made flesh, believe it

John 17​

17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

2 Timothy 3​

15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

John 2​

17 And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.
...
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Matthew 4​

1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

 

[Dino246]

Would you claim that those words have a non-literal meaning?

Do you maintain that only what is written in Scripture can be considered the truth?

I note that you don't answer David's question at all. Instead you fire off yet another loaded question to divert attention from yourself.

John 2:21 is not merely stating that the temple Jesus referred to was His body.
Rather, it demonstrates that the literal wording of God's message is not yet the truth in itself.
The truth is the revelation He gives concerning His words.

It says no such thing. You made this up to feign legitimacy for your extrabiblical "revelations".

 

[DavidLamb]

No. There are truths of everyday life that are not written in the Scriptures. "The square root of 100 is 10," is true, but it is not stated in Scripture. "King Charles III has a sister named Ann," is another truth not in Scripture. However, Scripture if the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice.

Too late to edit my post, but of course I meant: " However, Scripture is the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice. " Sorry for the typo!

 

[Dino246]

Too late to edit my post, but of course I meant: " However, Scripture is the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice. " Sorry for the typo!

There is plenty of grace for obvious typos.

 

[dkontner]

Amen to grace!!!!

 

[Godsgood]

No. There are truths of everyday life that are not written in the Scriptures. "The square root of 100 is 10," is true, but it is not stated in Scripture. "King Charles III has a sister named Ann," is another truth not in Scripture. However, Scripture if the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice.

I agree.

Yes, that is what I said. John explains in verse 21 that in verse 19, Jesus had been using picture-language. But both verses are in God's word. A special revelation from God is not necessary to tell us that Jesus meant His body, not the temple of stone.

No. There are truths of everyday life that are not written in the Scriptures. "The square root of 100 is 10," is true, but it is not stated in Scripture. "King Charles III has a sister named Ann," is another truth not in Scripture. However, Scripture if the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice.
I don't know whether you're doing it intentionally, but your answers come across as evasive and sophistical. I understand why, because you are making it clear that you do not yet know the one true God.

Those of us who know the true God have had it revealed to us by Him that physical life is different from spiritual life. There is truth that belongs to the physical realm, and that truth comes from man. There is also truth that belongs to the spiritual realm, and that truth comes only from God.

What we are discussing here is the truth of the spiritual realm. Therefore, by what you have said, you are exposing yourself as someone who does not know the one true God.

Let me ask the question again.
Do you maintain that only what is written in Scripture can be considered the truth?

 

[DavidLamb]

No. There are truths of everyday life that are not written in the Scriptures. "The square root of 100 is 10," is true, but it is not stated in Scripture. "King Charles III has a sister named Ann," is another truth not in Scripture. However, Scripture if the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice.
I don't know whether you're doing it intentionally, but your answers come across as evasive and sophistical. I understand why, because you are making it clear that you do not yet know the one true God.

Those of us who know the true God have had it revealed to us by Him that physical life is different from spiritual life. There is truth that belongs to the physical realm, and that truth comes from man. There is also truth that belongs to the spiritual realm, and that truth comes only from God.

What we are discussing here is the truth of the spiritual realm. Therefore, by what you have said, you are exposing yourself as someone who does not know the one true God.

Again you, who do not know me, are claiming that I do not know the true God. You claim that I am being evasive. Show me what I have written that has been evading the issue, then. You then go on to write as if you know the difference between physical life and spiritual life, and I don't. However, I do know that there is such a difference, because it is taught in the Bible, not by some private revelation to me from God. I have told you before that I agree that truth comes from God. As Jesus said in His high-priestly prayer, the word of God is truth:

Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.

You say that I am exposing myself as someone who does not know the one true God. You seem to be revealing yourself as somebody who makes public judgements as to the spiritual state of others here whom you do not know personally. I hardly ever report people, but if these sorts of accusations continue, I shall indeed report the posts in which they occur.

 

[GWH]

Again you, who do not know me, are claiming that I do not know the true God. You claim that I am being evasive. Show me what I have written that has been evading the issue, then. You then go on to write as if you know the difference between physical life and spiritual life, and I don't. However, I do know that there is such a difference, because it is taught in the Bible, not by some private revelation to me from God. I have told you before that I agree that truth comes from God. As Jesus said in His high-priestly prayer, the word of God is truth:

Jhn 17:17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.

You say that I am exposing myself as someone who does not know the one true God. You seem to be revealing yourself as somebody who makes public judgements as to the spiritual state of others here whom you do not know personally. I hardly ever report people, but if these sorts of accusations continue, I shall indeed report the posts in which they occur.

Yes, judgmentalism is wrong, which is why I try to always discuss doctrine rather than argue.

For example, when discussing election I share my opinion that the tulip doctrine is wrong/heretical,
but I never accuse Calvinists of being un-Christian. (IOW, I do not equate tulip with Calvin.)
If I am ever perceived as not practicing this attempt, please let me know, nicely.

 

[DavidLamb]

Yes, judgmentalism is wrong, which is why I try to always discuss doctrine rather than argue.

For example, when discussing election I share my opinion that the tulip doctrine is wrong/heretical,
but I never accuse Calvinists of being un-Christian. (IOW, I do not equate tulip with Calvin.)
If I am ever perceived as not practicing this attempt, please let me know, nicely.

Thank you. I agree. It is (or should be) perfectly possible to engage in discussion on Christian topics about which there are various views, without becoming rude or judgemental to those with who we disagree. Like you, I hope that if ever I seem to be being rude or judgemental to somebody, I hope they will let me know (nicely) and I will apologise.

 

[Dino246]

I don't know whether you're doing it intentionally, but your answers come across as evasive and sophistical.

Again you show your hypocrisy, complaining about others doing EXACTLY what you do.

Those of us who know the true God have had it revealed to us by Him that physical life is different from spiritual life. There is truth that belongs to the physical realm, and that truth comes from man. There is also truth that belongs to the spiritual realm, and that truth comes only from God

Your arrogance is astounding. Do you honestly think you are the only one here who understands the distinction between physical and spiritual life? That "God" has "revealed" it only to you? I guess your "god" has not "revealed" to you that God Himself is the source of all truth, both spiritual and physical. Who is the Creator of all things? Who decreed that 10 * 10 = 100? Who established the offset angle of hydrogen atoms in a water molecule? Who designed man's tripartite being? Man is merely the discoverer of truths established by God.

The only "truth" that comes from man is his own experience and perspective, and often he is objectively wrong, as you often are about spiritual things.

 

[Anchorite]

Joh 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Luk 19:37 And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen.

Joh 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Moses and Elijah did miracles.

But who is going to outdo Jesus in the miracles department and healing on an individual level.

We do not read of Paul and the disciples doing the wonders that Jesus did and in that quantity and severity.

We do not read of anyone feeding 5000 people.

We do not see mighty works going on today.

Joh 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Joh 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

But Jesus did mighty works and in abundance because He was testifying to Israel that He is the Messiah so He went above what the common saint can do especially when faith plays a critical factor in our salvation.

The same as Moses and Elijah went above the common Hebrew.

So an individual saint will not outdo Jesus in the miracles and healing department not even close.

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

But collectively the saints will impact more people than Jesus did but their miracles will not be as mighty because our salvation is based on faith.

Jesus could do such great miracles for He was there in person therefore those who accepted Him did not need faith so it did not impact their faith.

Which is why Jesus told Thomas blessed are those who have not seen Him yet still believes because it is by faith.

Individually a person cannot outdo Jesus in miracles and healings and the severity of those miracles.

So obviously Jesus was speaking of the saints collectively.

1Co 3:5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
1Co 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
1Co 3:7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

Which Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel but the saints have impacted the world to the saving of more people than when Jesus was on earth but God gets the glory.

A saint shall do greater works but not without the aid of the rest of the saints.

For who can out do Jesus and it would not be required of us seeing our salvation is based on faith.

You start pumping out some Jesus' wow that was amazing miracles then you would be violating faith.

Miracles will be done like healing but they will be done on a small scale and something the heathen can explain away which some will say it is a God on a positive side having that benefit to the spiritually hungry.

But you start doing eye popping, jaw dropping, and limp posturing, miracles you are violating faith.

So we cannot do greater works than Jesus in that category.

But collectively the saints can impact the world on a greater scale than when Jesus was on earth.

Of course some individuals have impacted more people than when Jesus was on earth in the preaching and teaching of God's word although maybe not personally in public.

You are merely adding your opinions to what Jesus declared, and trying to negate it.

Jesus said “he that believeth on me”, indicating an individual believer, not the collective.

Performing miracles does not violate faith, it is the result of your faith.

 

[Godsgood]

No. There are truths of everyday life that are not written in the Scriptures. "The square root of 100 is 10," is true, but it is not stated in Scripture. "King Charles III has a sister named Ann," is another truth not in Scripture. However, Scripture if the Christian's authority for all matters of belief and practice.

I agree.

Yes, that is what I said. John explains in verse 21 that in verse 19, Jesus had been using picture-language. But both verses are in God's word. A special revelation from God is not necessary to tell us that Jesus meant His body, not the temple of stone.

I agree.

Am I correct in understanding your answer? Do you agree that anyone who does not know the one true God also does not know the Holy Spirit?


Yes, that is what I said. John explains in verse 21 that in verse 19, Jesus had been using picture-language. But both verses are in God's word. A special revelation from God is not necessary to tell us that Jesus meant His body, not the temple of stone.

This is where human pride toward God becomes evident. Because once something is written, people assume that they already know its meaning. Yet this is merely a demonstration of how God intended the language of parables.

 

[Dino246]

This is where human pride toward God becomes evident. Because once something is written, people assume that they already know its meaning. Yet this is merely a demonstration of how God intended the language of parables.

There is no parable here. Jesus employed a metaphor, not a parable, and then He explained it.

There is also no human pride needed to understand what God plainly intended us to understand.