₦airaland Forum

obadiah777: did not happen at all. its a symbolic story

43When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!” 44The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, “Take off the grave clothes and let him go.” John 11

@ Obadiah777,

I don't like quoting all your writings. Are you saying the event of Lazarus didn't happen literally as a miracle?

ijawkid: Its like asking why a mechanic would revive a dead engine when he knows that in the long run that same engine would end up disintegrating(no machine can last forever).......

One good reason why Jesus ressurected lazaruz was to prove to many that he was from the living GOD ...........another reason was to give many a fore-glimpse of what he'll do in his kingdom.......

Chikena......

frosbel: Indeed bro and also to show what will happen on the last day when at the voice of Jesus all the dead in Christ will rise from their graves.

and I ENDORSE this TRUTH.....and adding the words of the Master,

New Living Translation (©2007)
Jesus told her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Anyone who believes in me will live, even after dying.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: John 11:25

@ Obadiah777,

Abeg comot for road joor. When did Wiki became your Bible interpreter? What happened to the Spirit of truth in you\us to help us interpret. I said, show us where it was stated that Lazurus' case was a parable? maybe with the phrase, "And he spake this parable unto them saying....". This phrase often introduces what is parable or not by the writers. Show us this in John 11 in the case of Lazarus.

^ Good bro. I need your contact please. I will email you now.

^ You don start again abi...did you read it was a parable. When parable are told, Christ always say it was parable. Where did you read Lazarus's case was a parable? Na so you dey do every Friday....you wan start again abi?

^ I'm not that making too much distinction of the same person of Jesus Christ. I'm only making distinction of the dimension(s) of the same person. If you follow all the epistles and the context with which it was written, you often find Paul use "Christ" first before "Jesus" as in Christ Jesus; and in some case, "Jesus" before "Christ" as in Jesus Christ. It's an allegory that belongs to the Apostolic works, so to say. I believe that's what okeyxyz was trynna point out for us.

^ lovely. The cross was the great divider between the old and the new; between the Jesus of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and the revealed Christ of the New Testament.

@ Ihedinobi,

I will respond to your post again later. But before then, kindly digest what okeyxyz wrote again. It's the same Jesus or Christ as we may want to call him BUT the dimension or revelation of the same person is different. It's like saying, Jesus is the lamb, Jesus is the door, Jesus is the way, Jesus is the truth, Jesus is the life. etc. Same person BUT different dimensions\revelation. I will respond to you post later.

Okey, send me email now please. Thanks

@ okeyxyz,

Try as much as you can, when you write, be specific to differentiate what law you talk about whenever you mention law. It appears that many readers might not know the difference in your writings. For instance, when you mean that law of Moses and when you mean the natural law and when you mean the law of the Spirit etc.

okeyxyz: If you don't follow Paul, then it's impossible to follow christ, because Paul's letters were the revelation of christ, his parables and the prophesies.

I've explained the above statement in my response to Image123. Please refer to it above.

okeyxyz: Christians are continously trying to imitate the Jesus who walked amongst us over 2000 years ago, but that was the jesus who represented the law instead of the jesus who represented grace. His representation of the Law(sin) was the reason he had to die so that the law(sin) could be legally abolished, but christians still subject themselves to this same law by using that Jesus as a standard for morality and imitation.

The above statement is TRUE and 100% CORRECT. Lemme try and do an expansion to the above statement.

Now, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are NOT the New Testament. They are the Gospel that records the lives and teachings of Christ. This teachings are FOUNDATIONAL to the New Testament that will effect AFTER his death. The birth of Jesus DID NOT START the New Testament BUT his DEATH.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Hebrews 9:15

The promise of eternal inheritance is NOT by the birth of Christ; it was BY MEANS OF DEATH. The new testament could have start until after his death and could not have been under the new testament in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; it has to be AFTER his death.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. Hebrews 9:16-18

English Standard Version (©2001)
But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law,

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, Galatians 4:4

Now, we need to understand two things were going on in Matthew, Matthew, Luke and John. 1. Christ was establishing teachings to his 12 Apostles and these teachings are what is carried on into the new testament and were foundations for the new testament that will effect after his death. 2. Christ came to fulfill and bring an end to the era of Moses' law. To do this, Christ had to represent the law in order to fulfill it and become the sin that is in the law of Moses so he can set us free from the law of SIN and DEATH by becoming SIN for us who knew NO SIN.

okeyxyz: 1. You have to cast away that Jesus and put on the new, resurrected christ that is dead to the law and therefore free from it and no longer bound to observe the moralities of the law.

2. Therefore you cannot continue to define right and wrong based on how the law defines them.

3. The law reinforces sin but a true christian CANNOT sin because the law is null and void to him.

1. TRUE and CORRECT. Because the Jesus that represented the law had to died to fulfill the law, Christians need died to the law of Moses that they might live in the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. The law of the Spirit of life is not obeyed by the Christian himself BUT it is being lived out by the Christian. It is the Spirit of life in such Christian that gives the empowerment to fulfill this law of the Spirit, the believer ONLY yields to the Spirit to fulfill or obey this new law.

2. Defining rights and wrongs based on how the laws of MOSES defined them is what is meant by this statement.

3. With the law (of Moses) is the conscious of sin BUT with the law of Spirit of life is the consciousness of Christ who now lives us by the Spirit of life. Yes, a Christian can fall or commit a sin and becomes condemn by the conscious of the law which condemns to death BUT yielding to Spirit of life, a Christian CANNOT sin and if he does, yielding to the flesh, the Spirit of life doesn't condemn such Christian unlike the law of sin and death.

4. What shall we say in all these, shall we continue in sin because we are under Grace or that Grace may abound? CERTAINLY NOT! But "if" it does happen, we have an advocate with the Father. There's a big difference between CONTINUE to sin thinking that the Grace is there AND "if" we sin, we have an advocate with the Father. The former is an abuse of Grace while the later is a function of our advocate with the Father.

Tgirl4real: Goshen,

Soft peddal with dis ur msg endorsement.

"Looking unto Jesus, the author and the finisher or our faith"

My sister @ the top,

I know you've left milk of the word and on the meat but now, It's time for the bone. Abi if that your egusi soup with the amala (represent the word) and better brokoto jam each other, if you chop finish, you no go crack bone ni? especially if na so called biscuit\soft bone? Abeg relax make you hear explanation joor....

Image123: The implications that we should cast away Jesus? That He is not our perfect example?

No sir! I'm glad you're the only one who ask questions from me to amplify whatever I say. I'm sure it's because you and I are used to one another. My statement was NEVER to cast away Jesus and as a matter of fact, I was pointing that scriptures to explain that, there's difference between the JESUS christ and CHRIST jesus whenever used in scriptures and it was Apostle Paul that did such job very well - REVEALING the CHRIST of Jesus.

Remember, he wasn't born Christ, he was born Jesus BUT he CAME as Christ from above. Christ is the divine and Jesus is the earthly if I may so say. Jesus is human, Christ is divine as we know. Hence, the Pauline epistle REVEALED the Christ that was first mentioned by Apostle Peter and you could remember, it was on that revelation that Christ said, "I WILL BUILD my church...".

What am I saying, we accept JESUS as our Lord BUT the Saviour is in the CHRIST, that is the RISEN Lord & the Messiah. A woman or anyone can call her husband lord BUT none calls others Saviour of their soul. Therefore, when we accept Christ as our Lord and Saviour, it is done ONCE and it becomes the foundation on which the epistles build on. Make I no talk too much, e don do

New International Version (©2011)
For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.

New Living Translation (©2007)
For no one can lay any foundation other than the one we already have--Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 3:11

Therefore, Christ is FIRST and FOUNDATION of our Christian life and on that is what we build on THROUGH the Apostolic teachings - the ones Christ himself chose to build on his foundation. Therefore, this statement (below) is TRUE!

okeyxyz: If you don't follow Paul, then it's impossible to follow christ, because Paul's letters were the revelation of christ, his parables and the prophesies.

If you're asking questions to mock, we'll leave you to yourself but if you're asking with the heart to learn and accept the truth, we will tell you the truth.

H. If you consider the verse in the analogy of the faith, saying that this verse teaches that Jesus gave those before the flood a second chance, is a contradiction of other Scriptures. This alerts you to the problem! In considering what the verse means you must consider the analogy of the faith. In other words, does this interpretation contradict other Scripture? Clearly this interpretation does, so you would be alerted to look for another possible meaning.

I. The next step would be to take in to consideration the other principles of interpretation. Using these principles you attempt to arrive at an interpretation that is not contradictory. Principle #4, "Context," would lead to you to read the verses before and after this one. The context of the verse would show you that Peter is writing about Christ's suffering and death for the sins of the world. This is the subject of these verses. (See verse 18) Verse 20, gives us the time of the preaching to the pre-flood people. It says, "When once the long-suffering of God, waited in the days of Noah." So the preaching was done in the days of Noah, not at the death of the Lord Jesus.

J. From the passage the explanation becomes clear. The pre-flood people were offered salvation, by Noah, who preached to them before the flood. The Principle, that we are to make Christ central to the Scriptures, points us to understand Christ made possible the salvation that God offered to the pre-flood people. Noah, in preaching salvation was preaching Christ! The "spirits" or the pre-Flood people who rejected Noah's warning and offer of redemption are in "prison" or hell awaiting judgment. This interpretation does not violate any doctrine of Scripture and is not contradictory. It then is the better, and correct interpretation. You see then that we are letting the Scriptures interpret the Scriptures.

K. The rule is a simple one: In interpreting Scripture you must always consider the fact that the Bible does not contradict itself. If a proposed interpretation conflicts with other Scripture then your interpretation is not correct. You then must continue your study and arrive at an interpretation that is not contradictory.

L. The New Testament is the revealed of the hidden truth or mysteries of the Old Testament. The New completes the Old. Hebrews 10:1 says the law was only a shadow of things to come and the reality is found in Christ. Luke 24:27 says Jesus was explaining things concerning himself from Moses to the prophets. That is, those things were pointing to him in the Old Testament. At the time Christ spoke these words, the New Testament wasn't written yet, he was referring to the Pentateuch; Moses' writings and the prophets. Many times, Apostles Paul uses the analogy of faith with the revelation of the New Testament to unveil many events of the Old Testament. Everything written in the Old Testament has its fulfillment or revelation truth in the New Testament. Therefore, when you study the Old Testament, go search out the complete revelation in the New Testament.

G. In theological terms the doctrine that God wrote the Scriptures and that every word of Scripture is inspired of God is called, "verbal plenary inspiration." This is the view of Scripture which the Bible itself teaches.

1. Definitions of the words are: VERBAL = "WORDS" and PLENARY = "FULL". It means that God-breathed the very word of God in full expression of His thoughts in what the writer of Scripture wrote. This means that every word that was written was the mind of God without error. In other words, although the Bible was penned by men, it was really from God.

2. God guided them in the choice of every word and expression. This does not mean God did not allow for personality and cultural background of the writer to be used in expressing God's Words. God allowed the writers to express His thoughts in their own way.

3. This is why we must conclude the Bible is without error. God wrote it and preserves it and not man. It is the product of God, and His very Word to man. It then is without error or contradiction.

4. When there seems to be an error or contradiction the problem is in the interpretation of the verse or passage not the Scriptures. If your passages appear to be a contradiction then your course of action is to continue studying until you arrive at the correct interpretation. Many times arriving at the correct interpretation of a passage of Scripture will take a great deal of study.

5. For example let’s look at one "so called" problem passage. 1 Peter 3:19 says, "By which also "He" (referring to Christ) went and preached unto the spirits in prison." At first, reading the verse appears to say that Christ after His crucifixion went into Hell and preached salvation to the lost pre-flood peoples giving them a second chance for salvation. This presents the interpreter of Scripture with a serious problem because other Scriptures clearly state man does not have a second chance to be saved. After death comes a man's judgment.

Job 21:30, states the "The wicked is "reserved" to the day of destruction."

Hebrews 9:27 "it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment."

Luke 16:22, the rich man in Hell, begs for mercy, but was denied even a drop of water.

Lesson Six

V. INTERPRET BY THE ANALOGY OF THE FAITH & WITH THE REVELATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

A. The Bible does not contradict itself. God did not intend the Bible to be contradictory. If a passage of Scripture seems to contradict other Scriptures the problem is not in the Bible. The problem is being diligent to comprehend what appears to be contradictory in its very own context.

B. Some may object to the premise that the Bible does not contradict itself. However, at the heart of understanding the Bible is understanding what the Bible says about itself. The Bible claims to be the very Word of God!

C. The term "Inspiration" is the theological term taken from the Bible which expresses the truth that the Bible is God's very word. To understand inspiration we must look at two classic Scripture verses:

1. The first passage is II Tim. 3:16."All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

2. The word "inspiration" can be literally interpreted "God-breathed." The Greek word is "theopneutos", which means "theo" = God, and "pneutos" = breathed. The Hebrew word is "Nehemiah" and is used only once in the Old Testament in Job 32:8. The verse is saying God breathed on the writers of the Bible and they wrote His very word.

3. The next passage is II Peter 1:21, "For prophecy came not in old times by the will of man; but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit."

4. Literally the verse is saying that inspiration is the process by which the Holy Spirit moved on the writers of Scripture and what they wrote was not their words, but the word of God. Heb. 1:1, "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in time past unto our fathers." God has at different times in the past, and in many ways has spoken to man. Paul and Peter add that what these men wrote was God's word.

D. Examples of how God spoke to man or revealed Himself and His will. Hosea 12:10 "I have also spoken by the prophets, and have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets." A literal translation of the verse says, "I spoke to the prophets, gave them many visions.

E. David said, "The spirit of the Lord spake by me and his word was in my tongue" 2 Sam. 23:2. God used men to speak to other men. When the prophets spoke what God had revealed to them, they used phrases such as "thus saith the Lord", or "the Word of God came unto me saying." They made it clear that what they were saying was from God.

F. To look at the matter in a practical way, what was happening was that as the writer sat down and wrote, God "breathed" on him by the ministry of the Holy Spirit. As he wrote the Spirit guided his thoughts so that what he produced was from God without error or omission. It was literally, word for word, what God wanted written.

@ Ihedinobi, well, I was only asking if we can deduce my statement from the verse quoted. I will address things said by okeyxyz that I supported later.

@ okeyxyz, You're needed here please.

In my promise to start another thread for us to discuss matters that arose from the Bible Study Course - https://www.nairaland.com/1226596/expository-bible-study-course-raising. I hope to find peaceful talk here with ourselves and others that might join in this discussion.

1.

Goshen360: Following all contributions. I will put everything together later so we can be on same page.

@ italo, kindly mention to us the accurate God's way to interpret so we can add to update plus examine it together.

And your response was,

italo: There is only one Church, one faith and one doctrine of our Lord, Jesus Christ (correct me if I'm wrong)

It is the duty of that one church to transmit God's one doctrine to the children of God and that is how it was for 1500years before the heretics came and turned everything upside down...now look at the confusion they have put you people.

The Church is infallible in its teachings because Christ has given the Church the Spirit to teach it the truth. That is why you believed that Mark wrote "Mark" and that it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Because the infallible Church told you so. The Church wrote the New Testament and compiled the Bible and declared it the word of God in the fourth century...and you submitted to their authority.

1Tim 3:15 says the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth.

That one church that was founded by Christ is the one that compiled the Bible in the fourth century...it is the same one that Luther broke away from in the 16th century to start this confusion...

That one church is the Catholic Church.

And I further asked,

Goshen360: @ italo,

Is your response above an answer to my question asked?

Again, you response was,

italo: Yes.

2., second subject of discussion.

Goshen360: A.

Please correct me if I'm wrong or misunderstood your words here. One the other side, the church was the Roman Catholic. On this side, the church is REPRESENTED. These people (Paul and Philip) are part of the church of God as you rightly said in which Ephesians 4:11-12 comes to play before the scripture was completely canonized.

B.

Also, like I keep saying and this will be stressed in the next lesson, there is place for the ministry gifts which Christ gave to the church. The case of Apostle Paul and Philip is one of it and the revelation being progressive then. The Bereans system is what we are doing with this Bible course - to learn how examine what is being taught.

C.

Yes, you're right - Apostle Paul taught the Bereans BUT what did the Bereans do? They examined and searched the scriptures TO FIND OUT IF WHAT APOSTLE PAUL TAUGHT WAS THE TRUTH - How to do that, like the Bereans is what we intend to embark on with this course. I hope you balance both sides and NOT just say we should turn to the church or ministry gifts alone; we MUST be able to search out the truth for ourselves and see if what the ministry gifts teaches is truth or mixed with error.

Your response,

italo: A

Why are you taking this issue back to the 'Catholic or no Catholic' thing? I deliberately left out the name 'Catholic' in my post so that we can have a better and reasonable discussion since there are many who would rather die than listen to the name.

Anyway, since that is the way you want it, you give me the opportunity to ask:

Who "completely canonized the scripture" according to you? When was it canonized and under whose inspiration? (please give evidence of your answer)

PLEASE ANSWER THIS FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION INSTEAD OF MERELY SCRATCHING THE SURFACE... God bless you as you do so.


B

You are not doing the 'Berean system.' The Bereans didnt search scripture alone, they searched scripture and listened to the Church - represented by one of its bishops, St Paul. Even Paul himself didnt practise this your "let scripture interpret scripture" system.

Gal 2:2 "Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2 I went in response to a revelation and, meeting privately with those esteemed as leaders, I presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. I wanted to be sure I was not running and had not been running my race in vain."

Did you see that? As knowledgeable as Paul was, he wanted to be sure he was preaching the right thing, he didnt go to scripture to interpret scripture, he went back to the LEADERS of the CHURCH to interpret God's teaching! And there is no mention of them reading scripture together.

C

You are not doing as the Bereans did. The Bereans listened to the Church - represented by Paul. Who do you listen to? Who is your "Paul"? Does pride make you to think that you are the "Paul?" And let us even imagine that you are the "Paul," who are the leaders you go back to (like Paul did) to confirm if you are preaching the right thing or heresy.. If you are "running in vain" or not? You run back to yourself?

PLEASE THESE QUESTIONS ARE BEGGING FOR ANSWERS O...

Acts 20:

28 Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
29 I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Which one are you now? Has the Holy Spirit placed you a BISHOP(verse 28)...or are you a RAVENING WOLF(verse 29)...or a you a part of the FLOCK(verse 28 & 29)...or are you part of the DISCIPLES DRAWN AWAY(verse 30)?

As for me, I am part of the flock being tended by my bishop who "rules the Church of God."

I know you are not a bishop and you are not listening to the bishop.

Doesnt that mean that you are either ravening wolf or a disciple drawn away?

3., third subject of discussion. Having debosky on the scene now,

debosky: God bless your efforts Goshen.

I'd just like to add one caveat to this expository: regardless of how much we study the word, there are bound to be disagreements when it comes to certain details - this happened even in Paul's day. As long as we agree on the one faith, one Lord and one baptism, we should seek to lessen the importance of disagreements on 'secondary' (I don't mean any scripture is unimportant) issues.

^^^

My response was to debosky was,

Goshen360: Thank you my dear brother. Yes, we will always disagree and you're right. We also hope to lessen our disagreement should everyone of us release ourselves to God's Spirit in the truth of this course. I believe the truth had already being completed in God word. We have read the disagreements in the days of Paul and read how it was resolved; it shouldn't be a disagreement to us anymore.

^ And you, italo picked up from the highlight above asking,

italo: How was it resolved?

My response was,

Goshen360: Resolved by Apostolic teachings.

italo: Until we meet at your promised thread for you and I.

^^^

debosky: I am also waiting for the ^^ above mentioned thread.

^^^

Goshen360: *smiles* It'd be nice to discuss with you too.

Thread officially opened for discussion. First subject of discussion first and then to the second and lastly the third. Thank you!

@ JeSoul,

Sister simply practice simple gospel......it's time to chew meat or bone....too much of milk of bad

^ Sharp-sharp...bookmarked!

@ JeSoul,

What okeyxyz wrote there is too much to one to digest but he said the truth. There is an unending REVELATION of Christ and it was Paul who did that job very well because Christ himself REVEALED to him. Well, you asked him (okeyxyz) the question and I will wait for him to answer but I can break down what he said, line-by-line on his behalf. However, I'll leave him to answer for himself.

@ Ihedinobi,

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. John 1:17

I do understand what you wrote but from the above scriptures, we can build a whole concept and truth on which the New Testament functions. Now, over to you,

1. What do you understand by this verse in respect to, "GIVEN......CAME"?
2. From this verse, can we say words were not just chosen, they were chosen for a perfect understand?....meaning,
3. Moses = Law
4. Jesus = Grace + TRUTH
5. Why not just\only GRACE, why add Truth?
6. Can we deduce that from Grace + Truth which = Jesus; then Moses which = law will also BE Moses = law + LIES

I hope we can pick it from there.....if these questions are answered. Thank you.

@ okeyxyz,

I want us (you & I), to start a "Grace and Law" based discussion on this forum someday.....just discussing and having fellowship with one another. I will be very glad to discuss with you brother.

okeyxyz: If you don't follow Paul, then it's impossible to follow christ, because Paul's letters were the revelation of christ, his parables and the prophesies. Christians are continously trying to imitate the Jesus who walked amongst us over 2000 years ago, but that was the jesus who represented the law instead of the jesus who represented grace. His representation of the Law(sin) was the reason he had to die so that the law(sin) could be legally abolished, but christians still subject themselves to this same law by using that Jesus as a standard for morality and imitation. You have to cast away that Jesus and put on the new, resurrected christ that is dead to the law and therefore free from it and no longer bound to observe the moralities of the law. Therefore you cannot continue to define right and wrong based on how the law defines them. The law reinforces sin but a true christian CANNOT sin because the law is null and void to him.

I'm Goshen360 and I ENDORSE this message!

^ However, lemme add more if perhaps, they will understand by this,

New International Version (©2011)
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, in keeping with the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus,

New Living Translation (©2007)
This letter is from Paul, chosen by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus. I have been sent out to tell others about the life he has promised through faith in Christ Jesus.

English Standard Version (©2001)
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God according to the promise of the life that is in Christ Jesus,

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, according to the promise of life in Christ Jesus,

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus,

2 Timothy 1:1

italo: How was it resolved?

Resolved by Apostolic teachings.

E. We must consider the following aspects of context in researching a passage.

1. Immediate Context
2. Broad Context
3. Parallel Context
4. Historical Context
5. Analogical Context

1. The Immediate Context of the verse means the verses just before and after the verse.

2. The Broad Context of a verse addresses the verse's place within the chapter and the entire book.

3. The Parallel Context of the verse refers to other places the word or text is found. It may be in the same book or a different place in Scripture; it often "parallels" one another in seeking to unloose unclear verse(s). An example of studying a parallel context would be consulting a Harmony of the Gospels to find other Scriptures where accounts of an event in the life of Christ are found.

In studying the parallel context, if the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, you would study the context of the Old Testament passage. This would help you decide why the New Testament writer quoted such and what it means where it was quoted from would be the same parallel of what it means where it was quoted or applied by the writer - omitting this principle is committing a great out of parallel contextual error that can damage the truth.

For an example you will find three accounts of the Temptation of Christ. Matt. 4:1-11, Mark 1:12-13, and Luke 4:1-13. Seeking a parallel context could give a greater understanding of a statement or event, as one writer may give information another would omit.

4. Seeking the Historical Context would lead to consulting history to find the setting of the statement. The Historical Context can be found from several places. First, would be from the Book that the passage of Scripture is found and\or was quoted from. Next, you could consult one or several of your Study Helps\Aids. Book on archaeological discoveries made in the Bible lands have shed light on many Biblical events. All these findings together would show the current traditions or political situations of the passage. In language studies how a word was used in the past helps reveal what was original meaning.

5. The Analogical Context is vital to arriving at the proper interpretation of a passage of Scripture. The analogy of a passage of Scripture deals with its resemblance or similarity with the rest of the Bible. This is discussed in detail in the next section. Briefly it means that Scripture does not contradict itself. If the passage you read seems to contradict some other Scripture, then you must study further to understand the passage.

Every Scripture is interconnected to all other Scriptures. You cannot take a verse or passage out of its context, a way from the other Scripture and interpret it correctly. This will lead us to the next principle of interpretation.

Lesson Five

IV. BE CONSCIOUS OF CONTEXT-TO-CONTEXT.

A. The context of a text or verse refers to its setting within a larger portion of Scripture. It refers to the verses that occur before and after the text. This would include the paragraph, chapter and book. The situation surrounding the text is relevant in understanding its meaning. The writers of Scripture wanted to convey to their readers certain information\truth\revelation. They wrote in the environment in which they lived. This is why knowing the background and current situation of the Scripture passage is so important.

B. For an example look at 1 Corinthians 15:32: The verse ends with the words, "let us eat, drink; for tomorrow we die." Without considering the context of this phrase it would appear Paul was teaching a person is to live a carefree life, getting all the "gusto" they can. A look at the context of the statement shows that Paul was teaching quite the opposite. He was instructing the Corinthians that there is life after death. Man will be judged and held accountable for his deeds. The point Paul made was that if there was no resurrection of the dead there was no reason to live a righteous life. In the 'context' of verse 33-34, Paul is rebuking the Corinthians for the way they were living. They were living as if there was not going to be a resurrection and this was to their shame! So we see that the context of a verse is very important and absolutely necessary for understanding or interpreting the verse.

C. Many false\contradictory teachings and beliefs, that are so prevalent today, can be traced to ignoring of the context of a passage or lifting a verse out of context and giving such a "private interpretations". In some case, mistakes\error can be made by sincere men who handle God's word. In other case, false teachers who have no fear of God and they deliberately deceive their followers.

D. There a denomination that quote 1 Corinthians 15:29, as their text verse in establishing their practice of baptizing the living for the dead. Paul in making this statement was not teaching a doctrine. He was using the practice of some pagan religions of baptizing for the dead as an illustration of the universal belief in life after death. How do we know that this is what he meant? Look at the context of the statement. From the context of the statement we can see that the subject of the passage is the resurrection of the dead.

Verse 12, establishes the theme Paul is addressing, "Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead." Contextually, verse 29 is a part of Paul's answer to this question. You cannot honestly say what this verse means without considering the context and everything said in conjunction to this statement. The Bible nowhere teaches that baptism for the dead are a Christian practice or Biblical doctrine. This is the only reference to such a practice in the Bible. There's nowhere else it agrees with another scriptures and from the mouth of two or three, every truth shall be established - you cannot make a doctrine out of just one single verse of scriptures.

A good rule is: "A text without a context is only a pretext." It is impossible to understand any statement without considering its context.

^ How do you mean?

debosky: God bless your efforts Goshen.

I'd just like to add one caveat to this expository: regardless of how much we study the word, there are bound to be disagreements when it comes to certain details - this happened even in Paul's day. As long as we agree on the one faith, one Lord and one baptism, we should seek to lessen the importance of disagreements on 'secondary' (I don't mean any scripture is unimportant) issues.

Thank you my dear brother. Yes, we will always disagree and you're right. We also hope to lessen our disagreement should everyone of us release ourselves to God's Spirit in the truth of this course. I believe the truth had already being completed in God word. We have read the disagreements in the days of Paul and read how it was resolved; it shouldn't be a disagreement to us anymore.

We ONLY seek to spread from here, how every Christian can do good study in the word and hold onto the truth. There's a great injustice being done to God's word and this we must hold onto the integrity of God's word. If everyone of us can do our part after this course, and spread the teachings; also making use of the course in our Christian life, with time, many long held error will be corrected.

Thank you brother!

^ Thank you sister Ope, blessed and glory to God who had given us this Grace and called us into this faith. We desire that every student will experience a transference of the Berean Grace through the Spirit of God to do diligent studies and spread this knowledge by imparting another Christian, one by one and let it spread. Thank you and to God we return all the glory.

Still, I'm first to grab my pop-corn with my diet soda beside me and my legs crossed; waiting for heavy stuff.