ECT Understanding the context

[Cross Reference]

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."[/B]
Genesis 3:5 (KJV 1900)

"When the apostle Paul says that “sin entered into the world through one man,” he did not mean a man like ourselves; he was speaking of the Federal Head of the human race, the noble being that God created. The third chapter of Genesis reveals how sin was introduced into the world. Watch the subtlety of Satan’s reasoning: “And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said . . . ?” The one thing he was aiming at was the dominion of God over man. “For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil” (rv), i.e. you will become god over yourself. Sin is not a creation, it is a relationship. The essential nature of sin is my claim to my right to myself."

Chambers, O. (1996). Bringing sons into glory: studies in the life of our Lord. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott.

 

[Danoh]

When I saw your thread title, I thought you had perhaps written something about the principles behind how to properly identify context...

 

[Cross Reference]

When I saw your thread title, I thought you had perhaps written something about the principles behind how to properly identify context...

In the finality of it all, Chambers is basically saying: "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup." 1 Corinthians 11:28 (KJV)

 

[Danoh]

In the finality of it all, Chambers is basically saying: "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup." 1 Corinthians 11:28 (KJV)

Again...

When I saw your thread title, I thought you had perhaps written something about the principles behind how to properly identify context...

But great passage; that :thumb:

 

[Cross Reference]

Again...

When I saw your thread title, I thought you had perhaps written something about the principles behind how to properly identify context...

But great passage; that :thumb:

There is only one way: Pursue God to "know Him". Get beyond being relational and into what He desires, . . "Intimacy", by that context can only by revealed.

 

[Danoh]

There is only one way: Pursue God to "know Him". Get beyond being relational and into what He desires, . . "Intimacy", by that context can only by revealed.

Have you ever found yourself saying to someone either "that was not what I had meant" or "whoops, I'd thought you'd meant such and such?"

Either to a total stranger, or to someone you know, who, say, also knows you?

 

[Cross Reference]

Have you ever found yourself saying to someone either "that was not what I had meant" or "whoops, I'd thought you'd meant such and such?"

Either to a total stranger, or to someone you know, who, say, also knows you?

Of Course and I now presume that is what you are looking for me?


Understand that what I posited is elementary "stuff" for a Christian who would desire to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. And if you do you are going to have to reach for 'stuff" that might always be beyond your grasp. However, in the attempt will you "know". And you will ask for you do not understand from a dispensition that wants to learn, not from a mind already made up and snapped shut.. . .

 

[Danoh]

Of Course and I now presume that is what you are looking for me?


Understand that what I posited is elementary "stuff" for a Christian who would desire to be a disciple of Jesus Christ. And if you do you are going to have to reach for 'stuff" that might always be beyond your grasp. However, in the attempt will you "know". And you will ask for you do not understand from a dispensition that wants to learn, not from a mind already made up and snapped shut.. . .

Very well; if direct, in your face is how you still want to deal with another in your arrogance despite your obvious ignorance on this issue...

Let's see now; if you can take as well as you give; or are just another one sided individual of the many that turn the Faith into the bondage that is legalism

In short, yeah - you do presume...

For the Bible is nevertheless; a book.

THEE Book.

But nevertheless a Book.

One gets the intended sense put in it through Words by the same means that one gets the intended sense of any word and or words as any other book.

How?

Via carefully attempting to note distinctions between this and that...

Nehemiah 8:8 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

John 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

Superstitious notions of some sort of a "a relationship with God..." as some sort of a golden key to understanding are just that - superstitious notions.

My question to you about how that knowing someone is no guarantee by itself that one will always get another's intended sense, was meant to cause you to consider your assertion from within a wider frame of reference.

Regrettably, to no avail.

You are still where you have been - in your own vanity and pride.

Never mind...continue in your superstitious "sense of" a thing, in your fool arrogance.

Sheesh but some people are stubbornly stupid...

:doh:

 

[Tambora]

Sheesh but some people are stubbornly stupid...

I think I'm the president of that club too.

 

[Cross Reference]

Very well; if direct, in your face is how you still want to deal with another in your arrogance despite your obvious ignorance on this issue...

Let's see now; if you can take as well as you give; or are just another one sided individual of the many that turn the Faith into the bondage that is legalism

In short, yeah - you do presume...

For the Bible is nevertheless; a book.

THEE Book.

But nevertheless a Book.

One gets the intended sense put in it through Words by the same means that one gets the intended sense of any word and or words as any other book.

How?

Via carefully attempting to note distinctions between this and that...

Nehemiah 8:8 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

John 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

Superstitious notions of some sort of a "a relationship with God..." as some sort of a golden key to understanding are just that - superstitious notions.

My question to you about how that knowing someone is no guarantee by itself that one will always get another's intended sense, was meant to cause you to consider your assertion from within a wider frame of reference.

Regrettably, to no avail.

You are still where you have been - in your own vanity and pride.

Never mind...continue in your superstitious "sense of" a thing, in your fool arrogance.

Sheesh but some people are stubbornly stupid...

:doh:

Direct and in your face???!! I have no intention of this becoming an argument which I suspected of you from the outset. .. . Bye, bye! And anyone else who wants to entertain you ambition.

 

[Danoh]

Direct and in your face???!! I have no intention of this becoming an argument which I suspected of you from the outset. .. . Bye, bye! And anyone else who wants to entertain you ambition.

No.

My intent had been an issue I strongly believe is an important one - a hoped for mutual exploration of how to arrive at both the context being described and its intended sense.

But as you have just noted; you took my words wrong the moment you read them.

Learning nothing from your own statement; that you go by YOUR "sense of" this and that, and not by seeking to identify context first, let alone, by seeking out intended sense.

:doh:

 

[Cross Reference]

No.

My intent had been an issue I strongly believe is an important one - a hoped for mutual exploration of how to arrive at both the context being described and its intended sense.

But as you have just noted; you took my words wrong the moment you read them.

Learning nothing from your own statement; that you go by YOUR "sense of" this and that, and not by seeking to identify context first, let alone, by seeking out intended sense.

:doh:

I haven't been able to understand ANYTHING you write either to be a question or an answer.. You're all over the map.

Read the OP for the best clarity, the which I understand and agree.

"Bye, bye.