ECT Is the ENTIRE Bible For Everyone?

vegascowboy

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Call me wacky, but I believe God and His word.

As someone who is frequently among Jews and has tasked myself with witnessing to them of the truth of the risen Lord, I am often asked about the merits of the Bible as a whole. Interestingly (at least to me), it is largely Christians who inquire what, exactly, I share with Jews with regard to the entirety of God's word.

So...Is the entire Bible for everyone?

It would be rather self defeating to desire greater understanding of the Bible by poking, prodding, corralling, and chopping portions out. This is not, in fact, greater understanding. It is simply taking what is written in God's holy word and shrinking it and molding it into something that is on our level.

God forbid that we ignore one word, syllable, or phrase from the complete sacred text of God's perfect word.

Rightly dividing the word of truth is not cutting off Scripture for our profit. By separating the parts into their appropriate context, we are in a better position to understand the whole.

The entire Bible is written for us, but not every verse is addressed to us or about us. In other words, all Scripture is profitable (Scripture tells us as much), but not every passage is for our participation or obedience.

I believe there is a grave danger in misconstruing what it means to rightly divide the word of truth. By right division, I mean acknowledging that the doctrine concerning the church today is found in the epistles written by Paul by the revelation of Christ Jesus.

God chooses His words carefully. What is gained from an understanding of right division is the proper interpretation of every verse into its dispensational context. While every book and testament is written for us, not every book and testament is written to us or about us.

Choosing not to rightly divide a passage into its dispensational context is the root of the majority of Biblical misinterpretation and errors taught today across so many pulpits. Vegas is a hotbed of them. I'm sure your own town is full of them as well. It gets my goat and often makes me weep for those who buy into so much drivel.

We should hold this in the highest priority, in my opinion, so as to not be led astray by the diverse and errant voices floating across the prairie.

It would behoove us to follow the precedent of 2 Timothy 2:15...

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth.

My heart breaks when I see and hear too many people trying desperately to somehow earn grace. No one can do more than what the Messiah did for us on the cross. To do so, in my opinion, is to spit on Him and His sacrifice. I for one have no intentions of doing that. It doesn't sit well with me when others try in vain to complete something that is already complete.

Since my return, I see many still throwing that tired old verse out there onto the table with a smug grin...James did indeed say that "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself." What too many fail to realize is that James was teaching justification to the 12 tribes under their law covenant. This was not written with the knowledge of the mystery of Christ, the gospel of God's grace.

There is nothing else that need be done (or, dare I say, there is nothing else that CAN be done). Colossians 2:10 should put to bed this notion of an earned salvation for good.

...and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority...

Christ did it all! Your only response is faith.

May the Lord God bless you all richly.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Paul is a hard sell to Jews.

Then again, it is a hard sell to many Christians who are hell-bent on trying to do more than God has done.



Hi and 2 Cor 3:16 has the answer about the Jews , that lived during Paul's time and into today !!

But when ever he should turn towards (the) Lord , the covering is being taken away !!

Other wise all Jews have a covering / VAIL , even TODAY lies upon their heart !!

dan p
 

vegascowboy

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
There are also way too many Christians trying to make Paul a follower of Peter.

Interesting that even Peter himself warned of those who distort Paul's words...

2 Peter 3:16

as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
What do you think of the Septuagint?
I ask because it includes several apocrypha books.

Judith
Tobit
Baruch
Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus)
Wisdom of Solomon
1st and 2nd Maccabees
the two Books of Esdras
additions to the Book of Esther
additions to the Book of Daniel
the Prayer of Manasseh
 

vegascowboy

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
What do you think of the Septuagint?
I ask because it includes several apocrypha books.

Judith
Tobit
Baruch
Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus)
Wisdom of Solomon
1st and 2nd Maccabees
the two Books of Esdras
additions to the Book of Esther
additions to the Book of Daniel
the Prayer of Manasseh

Truth be told, I know precious little about the apocryphal writings. What I've read seems to be a kind of historical journey of the Jewish people during the period between the Old and New Testaments.
 

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Truth be told, I know precious little about the apocryphal writings. What I've read seems to be a kind of historical journey of the Jewish people during the period between the Old and New Testaments.
That's a lot of silent years.
The OT seems to be missing the historical account of Alexander the Great's conquest and the later conquest of the Roman empire (prophesy yes, but no historical record).
All of that is over with by the time of the NT writings with the Roman empire already established.
Makes one wonder why GOD recorded for us all about Babylon and Medo-Persia historically, but not about Greece and Rome, and what might be the significance of leaving them out?

Just rambling thoughts.
 

vegascowboy

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
That's a lot of silent years.
The OT seems to be missing the historical account of Alexander the Great's conquest and the later conquest of the Roman empire (prophesy yes, but no historical record).
All of that is over with by the time of the NT writings with the Roman empire already established.
Makes one wonder why GOD recorded for us all about Babylon and Medo-Persia historically, but not about Greece and Rome, and what might be the significance of leaving them out?

Just rambling thoughts.


Ramble away! I always enjoy "seeing" the cogs and gears turning in your mind. You provoke me to thought, and that is a noble thing. Much obliged to you! :)
 

Myrrhcask

New member
"That's a lot of silent years."

The pregnant pause of history.

It took a silence to give time to evaluate all the prophetic revelation that came before and settle on a canon. Then it became possible to point out fulfilled prophecy when it happened in the life of the Messiah. Had there been a steady flow of revelation, the peculiar calling of the forerunner, John the Baptist, may have had less impact.

Although Maccabees and other books treated the Hellenistic period as chronicles of their time, those books never rose to the level of inspiration seen in the rest of the canon. Their inclusion in the Septuagint points to the need for a silent period of sifting, since the translation was done before the canon had solidified.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
"That's a lot of silent years."

The pregnant pause of history.

It took a silence to give time to evaluate all the prophetic revelation that came before and settle on a canon. Then it became possible to point out fulfilled prophecy when it happened in the life of the Messiah. Had there been a steady flow of revelation, the peculiar calling of the forerunner, John the Baptist, may have had less impact.

Although Maccabees and other books treated the Hellenistic period as chronicles of their time, those books never rose to the level of inspiration seen in the rest of the canon. Their inclusion in the Septuagint points to the need for a silent period of sifting, since the translation was done before the canon had solidified.




Not quite.

Judaism does not put the histories and the prophets on the same level as Torah, which is part of the trinity (Torah--eretz--Yahweh). When you said Septuagint at the end, I think you meant to say 'apochrypha'--outside of Torah--histories--prophets. The Septuagint had the OT as we know it today. It does not have any apochrypha in it. There is something sensible about this: the Maccabean writings simply don't have parts to them that sound like Haggai or Malachi.
 

Myrrhcask

New member
Not quite.

Judaism does not put the histories and the prophets on the same level as Torah, which is part of the trinity (Torah--eretz--Yahweh). When you said Septuagint at the end, I think you meant to say 'apochrypha'--outside of Torah--histories--prophets. The Septuagint had the OT as we know it today. It does not have any apochrypha in it. There is something sensible about this: the Maccabean writings simply don't have parts to them that sound like Haggai or Malachi.
Sep·tu·a·gint

/ˈsepto͞oəˌjint/

noun

1.a Greek version of the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament), including the Apocrypha, made for Greek-speaking Jews in Egypt in the 3rd and 2nd centuries bc and adopted by the early Christian Churches.



Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Sep·tu·a·gint

/ˈsepto͞oəˌjint/

noun

1.a Greek version of the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament), including the Apocrypha, made for Greek-speaking Jews in Egypt in the 3rd and 2nd centuries bc and adopted by the early Christian Churches.



Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk





Source?

In the Jerusalem Bible, the Apochryphal is marked off even though it is included. As I recall, they said they did that because of the Septuagint. Perhaps you mean that it is there in the LXX, but forgot to mention it was marked off as a separate kind of writing.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
But further about the OP:

Much of the NT is about the huge issue before Israel in the 1st century: follow the apostle's mission or follow the rebellious zealots? we don't have that issue before us all day now. So in a sense we don't even have all of the NT "about us" or we will miss its meaning if we skip that aspect.
 

Myrrhcask

New member
Source?

In the Jerusalem Bible, the Apochryphal is marked off even though it is included. As I recall, they said they did that because of the Septuagint. Perhaps you mean that it is there in the LXX, but forgot to mention it was marked off as a separate kind of writing.
Source. I dunno exactly. Yahoo brought it up when I typed in Septuagint. There was a tag that mentioned Oxford dictionaries, but I couldn't find more than that.

I don't think they roped off certain books as apocryphal at the time of the translation. They just titled them with their titles. Their purpose was to prepare a Greek translation of the Hebrew texts for posterity, not to make decisions about what should included in the canon. Others would make those decisions.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
Call me wacky, but I believe God and His word.

As someone who is frequently among Jews and has tasked myself with witnessing to them of the truth of the risen Lord, I am often asked about the merits of the Bible as a whole. Interestingly (at least to me), it is largely Christians who inquire what, exactly, I share with Jews with regard to the entirety of God's word.

So...Is the entire Bible for everyone?

It would be rather self defeating to desire greater understanding of the Bible by poking, prodding, corralling, and chopping portions out. This is not, in fact, greater understanding. It is simply taking what is written in God's holy word and shrinking it and molding it into something that is on our level.

God forbid that we ignore one word, syllable, or phrase from the complete sacred text of God's perfect word.

Rightly dividing the word of truth is not cutting off Scripture for our profit. By separating the parts into their appropriate context, we are in a better position to understand the whole.

The entire Bible is written for us, but not every verse is addressed to us or about us. In other words, all Scripture is profitable (Scripture tells us as much), but not every passage is for our participation or obedience.

I believe there is a grave danger in misconstruing what it means to rightly divide the word of truth. By right division, I mean acknowledging that the doctrine concerning the church today is found in the epistles written by Paul by the revelation of Christ Jesus.

God chooses His words carefully. What is gained from an understanding of right division is the proper interpretation of every verse into its dispensational context. While every book and testament is written for us, not every book and testament is written to us or about us.

Choosing not to rightly divide a passage into its dispensational context is the root of the majority of Biblical misinterpretation and errors taught today across so many pulpits. Vegas is a hotbed of them. I'm sure your own town is full of them as well. It gets my goat and often makes me weep for those who buy into so much drivel.

We should hold this in the highest priority, in my opinion, so as to not be led astray by the diverse and errant voices floating across the prairie.

It would behoove us to follow the precedent of 2 Timothy 2:15...



My heart breaks when I see and hear too many people trying desperately to somehow earn grace. No one can do more than what the Messiah did for us on the cross. To do so, in my opinion, is to spit on Him and His sacrifice. I for one have no intentions of doing that. It doesn't sit well with me when others try in vain to complete something that is already complete.

Since my return, I see many still throwing that tired old verse out there onto the table with a smug grin...James did indeed say that "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself." What too many fail to realize is that James was teaching justification to the 12 tribes under their law covenant. This was not written with the knowledge of the mystery of Christ, the gospel of God's grace.

There is nothing else that need be done (or, dare I say, there is nothing else that CAN be done). Colossians 2:10 should put to bed this notion of an earned salvation for good.



Christ did it all! Your only response is faith.

May the Lord God bless you all richly.

EXCELLENT POST!! Better than most. My compliments, friend.
 
Top